O TYM ODCINKU
Discover how leaders can move beyond AI experimentation to build trust, scale adoption, and create meaningful outcomes across defense, government, and enterprise organizations. In this episode of AI Changes Everything, see why leadership, mindset, and responsible AI adoption matter more than any individual technology. Explore more AI topics at http://www.oracle.com/aichangeseverything In this episode of AI Changes Everything, Tony Reeves, partner for AI in Defense at Deloitte, shares his perspective on one of the most important challenges facing organizations today: how leaders can successfully adopt AI in complex, high-stakes environments. Drawing on experience across defense, government, technology, and consulting, Reeves explores how AI is being applied across command, operational, and administrative functions. While public attention often focuses on autonomous systems and battlefield applications, he explains that many of the most immediate benefits are emerging through decision support, productivity, logistics, planning, and knowledge work. The conversation highlights how organizations can create value by focusing on real user problems rather than becoming distracted by technology for its own sake. A central theme throughout the discussion is leadership. Reeves argues that mindset often matters more than toolset and explains why organizations must move beyond traditional approaches to innovation if they want AI initiatives to succeed. He discusses the importance of multidisciplinary teams, user-centered design, trust, assurance, and creating environments where experimentation and learning can happen safely. The conversation also explores why many AI pilots fail to scale and what leaders can do differently to improve adoption and long-term impact. The episode examines some of the most important topics shaping the future of AI, including sovereign AI, resilient infrastructure, data strategy, energy requirements, assurance, governance, and the balance between human oversight and automation. Reeves shares his views on the future of competition, the changing nature of national security, and why organizations must prepare for a world where AI becomes deeply embedded in decision-making and operations. The discussion concludes with practical leadership advice, insights into preparing the next generation of leaders, and a thoughtful exploration of why human ingenuity, curiosity, and judgment will remain essential as AI capabilities continue to advance. For leaders navigating AI adoption, this episode offers valuable guidance on how to build trust, create value, and prepare for a rapidly changing future. Tony's Prompt of the Week: Please search my emails this week for any outstanding action items that need my attention, do not just include emails where I am directly @ mentioned but include emails that ask or imply that I need to take action. For instance, "What do you think?" or "Can you..." Estimate how much time it would take to complete the task based on these criteria: ○ Do now – 2 mins ○ Focus – 5 mins to 30 mins Do last - more than 30 mins Next, organise them into a table labelled as 1. 'Do Now,' 2. 'Focus,' or 3. 'Do last,' the date requested, a description of the task, a link to the message, and your estimation of the time required to complete each task based on the time estimation criteria provided, and present the table sorted by the label category. ------------------------------------------------ Episode Transcript:
00:00:00:00 - 00:00:15:06 Unknown The views expressed in this podcast are those of the individual speakers, and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of their organizations or call or its affiliates.
00:00:15:08 - 00:00:32:13 Unknown What role does I play in national defense? How does leadership need to evolve with the use of AI in that scenario? Where should I be applied and not in the context of command and control?
00:00:32:15 - 00:00:51:19 Unknown Hi everyone. I'm here with Tony Reeves, partner for AI in Defense at Deloitte. We're going to be talking today about the use of AI in a defense context. Okay, Tony, great to have you on here. I don't even know this. We obviously met previously. You are the first person I had on the list to interview for this. AI Changes Everything video series.
00:00:51:22 - 00:01:09:05 Unknown And I'm not just saying that. And it's because I had. I thought you had some really unique views about how I could be used. So no pressure then at that point. No, no, we're going to keep this very, very light. So tell us a little bit about your role at Deloitte. What you do, if you could please give us some, some background.
00:01:09:07 - 00:01:34:20 Unknown The journey. Sure. So I've been doing it six years. We are traditionally seen as a tax and audit company, a professional services firm. And six years ago, we deliberately started thinking, what's the future going to look like, especially in defense around technology and this idea that we have to be continuing what we've always done, helping clients fix difficult problems and challenges, but also be relevant in that future space.
00:01:34:20 - 00:01:56:07 Unknown And that means actually understanding the technology, how it's applied, what it does. And so I spent last six years in Deloitte trying to help us work out who is defense, security and justice. What does I mean for that sector? How do we start to adopt AI responsibly, safely and effectively? We need to be making sure that it does and lives up to its promises.
00:01:56:09 - 00:02:16:00 Unknown Prior to that, I've spent time in Microsoft, as a digital advisor. I've worked in the government. I've led major programs. And I spent 13 years in the Army. And so I have this weird, background of being an infantry officer, some who used to hide in hedges and carry heavy kit, as well as a techie geek.
00:02:16:00 - 00:02:32:06 Unknown And I was always a geek at heart. Coding in the early 1980s when I was a kid, and continue to do so. Excellent. But I think that that's what makes you quite unique. You know, you've sort of you've been on both sides of the fence, as it were. Okay. So why don't we start with just talking about where does it make sense?
00:02:32:06 - 00:02:55:05 Unknown Where is it appropriate to use AI in a command and control context within defense? And then perhaps where does it not? Yeah. I think that's, you know, that's a heart of I think so to the audience, I mean, most people saying what's defense doing with AI? And naturally there's a concern is a worry that like, you know, whenever something is not visible or not clear, people fear the worst.
00:02:55:07 - 00:03:17:01 Unknown And I think that, you know, often and sadly on regular as you know as well, panels will always be what about the Terminator? Robots are going to come and kill us, of course. And it's like, well, yes, there is a risk. But yet actually defense is taking that extremely seriously as an organization. And so where we're increasing is seeing the use cases really falling into two three parts.
00:03:17:01 - 00:03:38:00 Unknown Is this the yes the warfighting the battle space piece where of course in you know, Ukraine we see this all the time where where drones where they're controlled or automated. On both sides are causing damage and destruction. But that's a fairly small use case, although it's of course, going to grab the headlines, in the command space.
00:03:38:02 - 00:03:59:03 Unknown There's many activities which we as a civilians will just take for granted the idea that plotting a route from A to B, going from London to Birmingham, we'd immediately go to an AI and and a map system, say, what's the quickest route? And yet for defense, this is still relatively new in many cases because partly attention's on the battlespace as opposed to that command.
00:03:59:03 - 00:04:17:09 Unknown And control. And how do we make things more efficient? But then, of course, the biggest area, like every organization is in the office space, and that's where I think everybody is looking and saying, here's how AI today is making a difference to how we work, what we do and how we deliver the the outcomes that we have to achieve.
00:04:17:11 - 00:04:40:03 Unknown So there's sort of battlespace office space, command space. And right now you're saying fair amounts of it's happening in the office space and the command space okay. It's interesting because as you rightly say, all the headlines immediately go to the battlespace, but all the values and the impact is happening in the other, too, right? Yeah. And I think that, yes, there is a lot of work in battlespace.
00:04:40:03 - 00:05:00:23 Unknown And yeah, we see, many things in the headlines because it's always going to grab the attention. Last week, Ukraine announced that they had seized ground in Ukraine. Back off Russians, using purely autonomous systems. No humans involved at all. Apart from on the Russian side and Russian surrender to a small group of, remote controlled drones.
00:05:01:01 - 00:05:26:17 Unknown Yeah. So they is always going to be a headline grabbing story because nobody's interested in. I've used this AI to help me write this email. It's not going to make the 9:00 news isn't understood. Yeah. I like you. I spent a lot of time talking to mid and central government. And the impression I get is that there's a, there's a real willingness now to adopt AI and apply it to things like logistics and stuff like that.
00:05:26:19 - 00:05:57:12 Unknown You know, who are you typically working with? You know, is it the generals? Yes, I rose, and, you know, what are you hearing from them in terms of how they want to use AI? I think that's a that's a really big question is going to be lots of different ways to answer that. Normally my clients range from, government ministers and departments, who are probably trying to either implement a strategy or been told by, you know, that, head of state that we must do more in AI, either to create jobs or to move things or just to become more efficient.
00:05:57:14 - 00:06:18:11 Unknown The generals, of course, are increasingly starting to look at what does it mean? What how should I go? And, you know, and so in the UK, we've had some very forward thinking leaders. I mean, Tony Radican kicked off the Nelson project a decade ago, which was like, I don't know how much I is going to impact the military in the Royal Navy, but if we don't start thinking about it today, we'll never know the answer to that question.
00:06:18:11 - 00:06:37:14 Unknown So let's start exploring. It might be we spend a pound. It might be we spend more than a defense budget. And I bet if we don't explore, we're not going to know. And so I think that that sort of, you know, most generals now today are starting to feel we need to be moving faster out of the explore space and much more into the implement and adopt in the use space.
00:06:37:16 - 00:06:54:15 Unknown And I think the other bit, you know, the other group that we spend most of our time working with are the users, you know, in a way that, you know, AI is changing what we do. It's also changing how we do it. And traditional defense procurement of in 20 years time, I need to replace this battleship with aircraft Kiowas tank.
00:06:54:15 - 00:07:16:06 Unknown And so I need to define the requirements. Today is changing because the user is saying, well, I need it faster, quicker to day in in the battlespace. The technology is changing much quicker. And as a result, we have to spend more time listening to the people using the capability and the problems and the use cases they have, than perhaps the people more removed from that immediate problem.
00:07:16:08 - 00:07:33:10 Unknown And again, this is very similar to most civilian organizations adopting AI. We have to have the problem to fix, and that needs to be the person who has the problem helping us fix it. Understand that. Yeah, you're absolutely right. This is something we're seeing in banks and retailers, right? Start with the outcomes. Start with the user experience and work backwards from there.
00:07:33:12 - 00:07:57:00 Unknown Just can I talk a little bit about, you know, the mindsets required for AI. Because you're right. We see you know, generals and ministers say we need to adopt this. We need to move faster. But that's the mindset change, right? So a general that's been in position in well, for 30 years, compared to one that's maybe 4 or 5 years into their tenure, is in a different mindset that's required today.
00:07:57:02 - 00:08:16:10 Unknown I think that mindset is far more important than toolset, and it is much easier to talk about the toolset. It's much easier to to understand what a, you know, what a tank does. And, you know, as a young officer, you're trained. This is what a tank this is how it works, is how fast you can go. This is the type of hill it can go up.
00:08:16:10 - 00:08:40:01 Unknown And so all of that is defined. It's known. It's it's it's like you it's certain. And so the toolset, whether that software toolset and you know, products that are helping make decisions or it's the remains of the physical hardware toolset of a drone or an unmanned vehicle, you know, is also relatively easy to know. It's a comfort zone mindset and changing mindset.
00:08:40:01 - 00:09:09:23 Unknown I think that, you know, military have always been quite comfortable fighting the last war. And, you know, the cliche of, you know, the hardest thing of it, harder than putting a new idea into a general's mind is getting the old idea out of it. And I think that ability to put stuff into people's minds and say, you need to think about the problem to resolve it and then think about it all said people instinctively get when you explain it, when you talk, when we have conversations like this, people go, oh, so obvious.
00:09:09:23 - 00:09:29:14 Unknown Yes. And yet when you speak to somebody who has spent their entire career 30 years doing the thing that isn't so obvious, it sometimes needs people like us to say, that's how I think. Let's talk about mindset. The other thing I'd add about mindset as well is that often if we start with the toolset, we look at what do we have today?
00:09:29:16 - 00:09:48:23 Unknown And so look at I have a tank today and tomorrow I'm probably going on another tank because I understand tanks. So the toolset thinking that I so like you that known that's certain approach. You know suddenly encourages people to go I know this. That's what makes me valuable. That's what makes me important. That's what makes me a general.
00:09:49:01 - 00:10:04:04 Unknown And so I'm very comfortable just replacing like the like the leap of mindset is hard. And this is, you know, where we talk about use cases and the problem set. Once you have a tool set and you apply it to a problem set and you speak to the user and say, what are you facing? Is the problem the issue?
00:10:04:04 - 00:10:24:05 Unknown What's the thing that challenge you the most to achieve that overlap? So like I said, actually this tool sets useful, this tool sets obsolete. And that starts shifting people into the mindset of how do I learn more rather than being a know it all how to become a learn it all? And this is something I think Deloitte in particular have done very, very well.
00:10:24:05 - 00:10:49:15 Unknown Right. This whole thing of you know, the theory of AI, it's very, very hard for someone to get their mind around it. But the minute you identify a problem and you develop into a use case, and then you start building something, using the tool in a meaningful way, it sort of comes to life, right? Are there any techniques that you're using that are working quite well where you're you're helping people move along?
00:10:49:15 - 00:11:12:19 Unknown That sort of mindset journey towards going from theory to practical application of AI. Any best practices or techniques that you've seen that have worked well? I think that one of the advantages that organizations like Deloitte have, compared to, I'll say, pure technology companies, is that we have a long history and, you know, business in helping people change how they think that transformation of business change that.
00:11:12:19 - 00:11:34:16 Unknown So like you, here's a problem. Let's think about differently. What ideas have you got. And sometimes, you know, being a consultant is a is a blessing and a curse, you know, because the first bit of it is like you're going to tell me what time it is by looking at my watch. And that sort of, you know, consulting approach, has a certain oh, it's trickery, it's games, and yet it's really effective.
00:11:34:16 - 00:11:58:19 Unknown It's a, it's an effective way of getting people saying, let's think this differently. Let's think about this in a different way. Let's let's start putting together all these ideas and prioritizing them then. And this is what the change has been in the last six years is how do we start applying that technology mindset, that technology delivery, that way of working in a more agile, flexible, lean startup manner to that consulting business and also with our clients to fix our problems.
00:11:58:19 - 00:12:28:08 Unknown And so I think that we had a a natural advantage. And we can merge those two. We've had to learn far more about delivering technology with hands on to bring that capability in. And that's giving away our secrets here because people said, well, perhaps I can start learning some consultancy stuff, but I think know very much, you know, if you're talking to users and especially users who aren't used to talking about their problems, you know, more used to a system where I've given to the requirements manager, they're going to fix this for me.
00:12:28:09 - 00:12:48:01 Unknown Yeah. If you're talking to users, you need those techniques. You need those abilities. Make them feel comfortable to share ideas, to have open discussions, to realize that failure is going to happen. But that's okay. Yeah, that reassurance that we're going to help them through the failure to learn, we're going to do that quite quick. So all those techniques, which we'd always have as an agile delivery team, that's what we've been trying to bring together.
00:12:48:03 - 00:13:12:12 Unknown So it's understood. Yeah. We spoke a little bit about the human element, the mindset element. And one of the phrases we always use in sort of corporate AI is human in the loop, you know, in the flow of work. Do you have a view onto when there should be a human in the loop for use of AI, or if there are situations where you absolutely want completely autonomous control when it comes to defense?
00:13:12:14 - 00:13:34:20 Unknown A couple of things on this, I think that the average general thinks there is strategic as Eisenhower, as good looking as George Clooney. You know, and as competent to you as a far better than anybody else. It's in their command. And yet the average general is kind of average by definition. And so we end up trying to get the average.
00:13:34:20 - 00:13:51:19 Unknown Don't think, well, you know, there's things I can do to enhance you, to make you better, can just support that decision. And we've had histories of this, you know, not just, you know, in the last ten, 20 years, but if you go back to Second World War, people using science and data to make decisions like, do we invade Normandy this day or do we delay it?
00:13:51:19 - 00:14:11:06 Unknown You know, those difficult, hard decisions scientifically based, all the AI is doing is presenting that science in a faster, quicker way. In many cases. And so I think part of the challenge with people is to try and get them into a point of saying, I can use AI to enhance what I do. Once we get into that space, then it's a question of what do I not want to use AI for?
00:14:11:08 - 00:14:35:16 Unknown Yeah. When we talk about the battle space area, people quite rightly get worried that without human control, we're going to have a similar problem to the mine issue that we've had in places in Croatia and Bosnia. You know, Croatia last month declared that finally, you know what, 25 years after the conflict was resolved, so I 30 years after conflict resolved, then I mind free as a nation.
00:14:35:16 - 00:15:00:05 Unknown You think in the 30 years they've been living with the consequences of of uncontrolled munitions? So people are quite rightly worried about AI without humans. Yes. Causing unknown issues and problems. And so we certainly need to have humans with control over AI and consciously thinking, how do I use it? But the debate we often get into then, do we have humans in the loop?
00:15:00:07 - 00:15:36:03 Unknown You know, the average normal military officer will say, of course we do. And the ethical AI technologies will say, of course we do. We must always have humans in the loop. And yet the concern is this if an adversary is using AI to move faster, to think quicker, to create damage, to our soldiers, to kill them more efficiently, effectively and more rapidly, then will we as a society be comfortable that we are maintaining humans in the loop at the cost of human life?
00:15:36:05 - 00:16:09:15 Unknown Now, we could argue that this is one reason why we need international regulation around the use of automated and autonomous systems in the battlespace, and we certainly should discuss that. But the same time, we need to recognize that we need human control. But it does not necessarily mean that humans need to be in the loop. I'd say that in the next couple of years, we increasingly going to see autonomous systems acting without humans, but controlled by humans on what their targeting is, on what they do, and with controls to deactivate those devices once their mission has either succeeded or failed.
00:16:09:17 - 00:16:28:05 Unknown That's where I think we're going. And it's exactly the same as you say in the office space. Right there are in the same over. I have conversations with with banks and governments and retailers every day as to where you want to give agency to the agents and allow them to have full autonomy. You know, you will have those exact same scenarios in defense.
00:16:28:08 - 00:16:54:01 Unknown Right? I think just don't continue that. You know, back in 2017, I was one of the people who signed the Future of Life paper to say that we need to have better control over lethal autonomous systems. And I maintain that view. We need to have better control over lethal autonomous systems. And I often say, I don't think that that is putting humans in the loop to do that control, because we will end up with a worse problem than what I'm trying to solve.
00:16:54:03 - 00:17:17:23 Unknown But things I think we do need to discuss is, you know, when, in 2007, Estonia was attacked and hacked. We had the Tallinn Manual that got published afterwards, and the Tallinn Manual is guidance for military commanders by lawyers as to what is, within the law of armed conflict for the use of cyber warfare.
00:17:18:01 - 00:17:45:09 Unknown That manual gives very clear direction which military commanders can understand, which says if I use cyber warfare to do this, if I destroy hospital systems, that is probably going to be a war crime with serious consequences as a result, that guidance is essential for the conduct of any type of cyber attack or defense. Yet we don't have that similar option, that similar manual, that similar guidance for the use of AI in a battlespace.
00:17:45:09 - 00:18:06:09 Unknown And I think we're increasingly seeing AI that can do significant damage and significant harm. And we are leaving it to the commanders in the field to make those decisions about law of armed conflict, which they are trained in, and they get regular updates on as to what is legal and not. Yeah, but the application is hard. So that's why I say we don't need a human in the loop.
00:18:06:11 - 00:18:33:22 Unknown It's why we need to be debating what are we comfortable? It's important to balance, and we must always consider the human element, particularly for the commanders in the field, to shift in a little bit. You spoken, in the past about, you know, that mix of algorithms, compute data, energy. What are you seeing? Are we getting better at using compute using the data energy is obviously something that's being discussed.
00:18:33:22 - 00:18:44:08 Unknown Now, you know that mix of those four elements? Are there any that, we're, we're doing better at or worse at some. What's your view? Yeah.
00:18:44:10 - 00:19:01:07 Unknown My first defense AI job was 1999 during the first bubble. And it was like, is like discovering a new world. It was just like, we can do all this things. It's amazing. It's going to be awesome. It's going to be incredible. It wasn't and is really dangerous and is really bad. And it was just like, yeah, oh, really doesn't work.
00:19:01:07 - 00:19:27:16 Unknown Oh, no. But where that drive came from was compute an algorithm, know the algorithms which had been built and developed over many years. Suddenly, with the arrival of the internet, we saw anything at all. We've got. We've got compute now. We can now start doing it. We got really high. Great compute capability. Surely if you throw enough compute at the problem with a really clever algorithm, we can infer confident and right decisions.
00:19:27:18 - 00:19:46:18 Unknown We couldn't, we didn't. It wasn't a good answer today. I think that, you know, with the internet embedded into our lives, that gives the data aspect, that gives us the access to understanding, which is obviously created large language models. And, you know, GPT and I mean, jump in this whole world today where people have AI, multiple eyes on their phone.
00:19:46:18 - 00:20:11:05 Unknown That's all because the data has been understood, exploited and used to help create, artificial intelligence, data is the real shift, isn't it? The data is actually being able to understand, to comprehend, to place your more sensitive data in a field of wider understood data and, and say, what are the differences, what is happening and whether that's health care and saying, here are my patients data.
00:20:11:05 - 00:20:29:06 Unknown How do I share that in a trust environment to see, do I have patients with a case that I can help cure quicker, or whether that's defense data is at the heart of where AI is? The last one, as you mentioned, is Sunny Energy. Yeah. And I think that the military adoption, we're still starting to work out that.
00:20:29:08 - 00:20:51:21 Unknown Yeah, all this compute, all this data, all this algorithmic driven decision making costs, energy. And the one thing that defense is good and bad at is energy. I mean, on the bad side, we have fast jets that burn thousands of gallons of fuel in a minute. So we have high capacity energy and it really bad at making it efficient and effective.
00:20:51:21 - 00:21:11:01 Unknown Nobody's like talking much about the energy management for algorithmic use in defense. They're talking about do I have access to some energy? And energy will always be there. So I think data and energy of the two real big topics, which will be it's interesting. I hadn't considered the energy part. Yeah. Obviously there's a race energy when it comes to AI.
00:21:11:01 - 00:21:36:21 Unknown We're looking at alternative approaches, but this whole drive of efficiency, it takes on a whole new meaning when you're, you know, away from central HQ over the centralized cloud data center. So just using that same amount of energy much more efficiently, something I hadn't considered. One of the things that one of my old programs was the fitting control systems onto military vehicles and and replacing tactical command and control.
00:21:36:22 - 00:22:01:18 Unknown And, you know, one of the debates we saw get into was on one side, every vehicle becomes a node for artificial intelligence was back in 2015. So just like every vehicle is a node for artificial intelligence and, you know, decade ago, ever seen what nonsense is this? Yeah. Well that's decades away. Artificial intelligence. But the biggest hurdle was the power supply within the turret and trying to say, well, actually, if I want to have a faster compute capability, I need more power.
00:22:01:20 - 00:22:21:16 Unknown That power is coming off of the engine running, which creates thermal signature, or the batteries running, which drains the batteries. And I probably need that for other things like life support and surveillance and total control and weapons systems and stuff. And so in parts we're quite good at energy management, but scaling and consciously thinking about saying, I need to upgrade this capability with an edge, compute that.
00:22:21:17 - 00:22:40:01 Unknown Yeah, it will suddenly provide the comms network for a bigger compute back there. Yeah, higher bandwidth going backwards and forwards plus the energy management. That's a debate still behind our defense. I was I'm actually seeing the same thing playing out actually in police forces. Right. Yes. How do you create almost this private mesh network where it's completely distributed and highly resilient?
00:22:40:03 - 00:23:00:16 Unknown Just going back to data, one of the things I think that has changed is if we were having this conversation maybe five years ago, it would all be about big data. Yeah, take all your data, put it in one place, prepare it, unify it. Off you go. Now, I think we're becoming much more selective around which data we use.
00:23:00:18 - 00:23:21:15 Unknown But also we've learned this new trick of bringing the algorithm to the data and not the data to the algorithm, which which I think has just opened up so many more scenarios for how we how we use AI. Are you seeing something similar as well? Certainly not that big data. We need a data lake. We need to publish publicly, you know, so put everything into one big puddle when there's often a puddle as puddle like that.
00:23:21:17 - 00:23:41:10 Unknown If one big problem is like, that's all my data. And you're entirely right. And that's like you ability to. Can we put the algorithm and the compute where the data is and then save bandwidth, especially for military purposes, because bandwidth is the hardest thing to command on the battlespace, where it's all being denied by the enemy or you don't have enough of it.
00:23:41:10 - 00:24:02:06 Unknown Yeah, there's no organization apart from the US military that has relatively unlimited data bandwidth and even they have a limited relativity. So I think that sort of I get that that requirement to start putting capability forward and whether that's, NPU chips or whether that's going to be GPU chips push forward. Yeah, that's something that's a really exciting possibility.
00:24:02:08 - 00:24:25:12 Unknown But increasingly we're not seeing that sort of necessarily that thinking in, in many parts of defense. The other thing as well, of course, is creating small and medium scale language models, you know, highly bespoke, trusted, safe capability that does limited create limited solutions or use cases, but therefore run on lighter compute, lower energy, smaller amounts of data as a result.
00:24:25:14 - 00:24:47:23 Unknown I think we're starting to see a shift in the the large AI providers and more bespoke solutions. You could argue that they're starting to differentiate about we do this, we do coding better, we do imagery better. We do understanding or language better. But nobody's really shifting. Perhaps Mistral, maybe a sign shift into that deployed edge. Bespoke compute capability.
00:24:47:23 - 00:25:06:14 Unknown Yeah I agree I think definitely starting to see the early signs of, you know, highly optimized specific small medium language models that solve 1 or 2 tasks incredibly well, and the footprint is much, much lower, right. The ability that you could deploy potentially on a small device, I don't know as well. You have that high degree of assurance as well.
00:25:06:18 - 00:25:24:01 Unknown Yes, because now you have an algorithm which is doing 1 or 2 things, and therefore all the training and the understanding and the knowledge there to use that safely is easier and simpler. Yeah. It's going to identify this. It's going to say yes or no to that. It's going to tell you this or information if it's telling you anything else, it's not working.
00:25:24:01 - 00:25:41:22 Unknown And in terms of cost efficiency but also security, it's a lot easier to lock these things down. And yeah, and we're working with Mid-Year assurance partner for AI and that's very much what you want to get into is to saying, okay, if you work out what that, you know, same as the secure by design or to about trustworthy by design.
00:25:42:04 - 00:25:58:22 Unknown Start early, start thinking about what to use cases. Start thinking about what a data is, stopping what the user is going to do. That's a much easier thing to accredit and assure and to trust than if we're trying to say, well, it could do this and it could do that, and I might get this bit of information, you know, simplify it.
00:25:58:22 - 00:26:17:13 Unknown Problem sets allow us to start saying, okay, that is a simplified tool set to govern and control. That's interesting because that's another thing that I'm a big believer. And, you know, you know, as I said five years ago, we be talking about big data, but also five years ago, we'd be talking about solving the entire problem before we get moving.
00:26:17:15 - 00:26:43:15 Unknown But now this ability to break it down and simplify it, get going and then iteratively go build as we go, I'm seeing that a lot in sort of the enterprise space. Is that something that you're seeing in defense, where we're breaking the problem down into smaller chunks and simplifying 100%? But you are. But I imagine you also seeing that, you know, chief finance officers are less comfortable with that because from an enterprise scheme, they want to say I want X amount return on investment.
00:26:43:15 - 00:27:01:01 Unknown And I'm going to introduce the AI to do that, return on investment in the same way as, you know, back in the 90s, probably the migration to yeah, we're both old enough to remember Microsoft Office 95 coming out and stuff. Yeah. Office was seen as this is going to fix this problem. This is going to and we all did the same thing in the same way.
00:27:01:01 - 00:27:25:03 Unknown If we send an email subject to type two email press send. It goes it's it. And the training is very simple. The return on investment is I now don't have to post stuff using stamps saving I can I send millions of emails every day less we're saving I mean but that's why I go. That shift is quite easy for economic chief finance officers to calculate once we start decomposing almost individual use cases.
00:27:25:03 - 00:27:42:19 Unknown This the soldiers going to use AI for that. This office is going to use it for that. This person is going to use AI for that. So the return on investment becomes very individualistic. Yes, I think all of that ends up and you can quantify it much easier. Well, you can, but yet when you aggregate that up it's much harder because it's not a it's not a simple calculation.
00:27:42:19 - 00:28:02:05 Unknown So we did some work with the minister defense where we're looking at the adoption of AI. One of the feedbacks we had was that for people who are neurodiverse, it was a far higher net satisfaction score that came out because they suddenly found they didn't have to get stuck in the process, which they struggled with. They could use AI to guide them through an answer, the process.
00:28:02:05 - 00:28:25:21 Unknown So that return was significant for that percentage of the workforce was quite large. Who struggled with process. I'm one of those people who really struggled to process. And so, you know, having I do it for me it but what we end up with is when we try to aggregate that up, the question is, well, how many minutes did we save per person or have you that stuff that's like enterprise way of thinking about return on investment.
00:28:25:23 - 00:28:52:10 Unknown Is being challenged by AI very, very hard because we are having to almost create an individual return on investment and somehow aggregate those up. I'd save many hours by not attending meetings when I'm not needed, but seeing the summary of it and then getting that understood to me does everybody have that use case? No. And so we can't just blank it out so much as you do to the email to every we use email on average X people send X amount of messages per day the return and say that's interesting.
00:28:52:10 - 00:29:25:20 Unknown Yeah. Because I'm it's almost like you Evans paradox. Right. If you free up 50% of someone's time, doesn't mean you all get to go home 50% earlier, right? Yeah. Actually, the research shows they actually end up working more because they have, you know, more time to invest. Are you seeing a level of scrutiny from the finance teams around the, the, in the initial investment I pilots and then the return on investment in the same way that we're starting to see now, because we all know the figures, like 80% of AI pilots failed.
00:29:25:22 - 00:29:44:02 Unknown I think that's changing now. But are you seeing similar levels of scrutiny, I think is the scrutiny, commercial engagement. And one of the big things I've seen, certainly in the United Kingdom, starting to shift in some parts of NATO, is that the commercial teams are changing how they contract for digital capabilities, not just AI, but digital capabilities.
00:29:44:04 - 00:30:00:16 Unknown And so they're increasingly starting to, you know, to be interested at the start of the idea. And when, you know, traditionally, you know, security creditors had this the same issue is that they get called in at the end. We've built this. So we're going to do this now. Come in. Accreditation and commercial teams often were doing exactly the same.
00:30:00:22 - 00:30:17:13 Unknown We decide are we going to buy this go and buy it for us. And so the commercial teams really struggle with that. So what we ended up with is commercial teams now again, very engaged early on to say, what are you trying to do? How are you trying to do it. What timescales you trying to do it. And so they are able to say, oh, here's the best way to build that capability.
00:30:17:13 - 00:30:33:04 Unknown And we've seen some really significant changes over the last 4 or 5 years with the mindset of the commercial team who are curious and want to know what's going on. You know, first time I had a commercial officer turn up in a meeting with a client just because they want to know what's happening as opposed to something gone wrong.
00:30:33:07 - 00:30:50:17 Unknown Yeah, that was a shock. But actually, that's exactly what I'm seeing regularly, regularly, regularly now with commercial team. And the same with that accreditation team. You know, that the security, the assurance piece. Yeah. So much easier. You start with that. You work through the process, you provide evidence as you go that it's working. That was the use case different.
00:30:50:19 - 00:31:09:05 Unknown Well this is what the consequences. And Sean's team couldn't say yeah okay. We understood that we anticipated that or we didn't anticipate that. But we understand where it's going. So I think is a real shift. Yeah. And I'm seeing the same thing, you know, commercial teams, finance teams, but also HR are suddenly turning up, sitting in the back of these meetings and starting to participate.
00:31:09:06 - 00:31:38:17 Unknown I think as a sign of maturity. I welcome it actually, because I think it's really good because just keeping this in the labs or in the tech teams, it isn't going to scale, right? We have to get this out into the other of business. Oh yeah, I think I 100% agree. And I think that if any organization that's deploying AI through their CIO is probably seeing that 80% for exactly where we have diverse multi, skilled teams coming together to say, I've got this problem, I think I can help us.
00:31:38:17 - 00:31:57:11 Unknown And then the tech team are helping them deliver it. The HR team is saying, okay, how do we deal with this? Where does it go? You know, the commercial team saying, what's the best way of not just contracting it for day one, but supporting it and refreshing it? And how often do we need to change the model, the support, the package, perhaps need to a whole new project in a year's time?
00:31:57:13 - 00:32:21:00 Unknown You need to mingle those two people together. Those intelligence organizations, to me, is is the most fundamental shift that we're saying, right. That's the key to success. And it's ironic. I can help them do that. Yes. But this reality becomes self-reinforcing. So one of the things I have to ask you, you know, the phrase that's on everyone's lips, we've kind of touched on a little bit is something I, okay, trust.
00:32:21:02 - 00:32:48:16 Unknown I'm certain that this must be something that comes up almost every day when you work with your clients. It certainly is for me. What's your view on solving AI? What are you hearing from defense? I think the, the current situation globally where we have an increase in conflict, you know, we've had a long period, especially in the west of a decrease in conflict, and a more stable and peaceful society.
00:32:48:16 - 00:33:12:04 Unknown The whole peace dividend, post-Cold War, has led society to think, well, we're in a period of peace and will always be in a period of peace. And that, I think, is a flawed assumption. It assumes that everybody is interested in maintaining the current status quo. And we're seeing many world leaders who are either deliberately or accidentally disturbing that status quo.
00:33:12:06 - 00:33:37:05 Unknown And so we end up with, first of all, this increased conflict, uncertainty. We've also seen a rise where national interest has since become more important, not the most important. And we still see a huge amount of, a global cooperation and collaboration. But national interests are more important going the national interest is this where do I go with my data?
00:33:37:05 - 00:34:00:16 Unknown My. I may take technology. And if you start looking into, you know, I as a fundamental driver of growth in a society, then owning, being responsible, being it trust it, be able to just declare it as I have confidence that won't be switched off by an adversary or by competitor, or somebody else will outbid me. And then suddenly is a national organization, national state.
00:34:00:17 - 00:34:41:00 Unknown I'm not providing that critical capability. That's obviously on every political leader and senior military officers mind. It's like, can I trust the access and availability of that system, not just the nationality and the origination of that system. And so we I think seeing every NATO country starting to come together and saying, at what level do I need to have purely sovereign capability, where everything from the energy supply to the data to the compute, to the facilities, to the failover capability, to the management, to the build, all of that is entirely done by my single nation.
00:34:41:02 - 00:35:01:23 Unknown How much of that can I collaborate and share with and trust allies to build, and how much of that can I genuinely say? It gives me higher resilience, higher fail over higher assurance, higher trust by being able to suddenly say, well, actually, this energy system has been destroyed in my country and therefore I need to switch over to this instead.
00:35:02:01 - 00:35:31:14 Unknown I think it's a difficult debate. If you look at the start of Ukraine, you know, in day one, their largest data center was destroyed. You know, it has become critical. National data is a critical national infrastructure. On day two, they started using data centers outside Ukraine to maintain capability and decision making. So I think that the idea that sovereignty is really important, sovereignty does not mean nationally everything is stored in a bit of tin next door in the office, and I can go and kick it occasionally and switch it back on and back off.
00:35:31:16 - 00:35:50:08 Unknown It's a very difficult debate. Something that's interesting. You say that because you ago we had this conversation around deploying Oracle, deploying data centers physically in the nation. But if you look at what just happened in the Middle East, we did have a lot of clients saying we want to take our applications and our data and physically to put them outside.
00:35:50:08 - 00:36:13:09 Unknown So it turns out actually to have sovereign capability. Requires you to work with a global provider. And one of the things I had and if you have a view on this, do you think it is even possible when you look at the supply chains or the technology that is provided to be 100% sovereign in building a cloud data center or providing AI?
00:36:13:11 - 00:36:34:06 Unknown I believe that some nations in the world are achieving that goal in China, for instance, where they're going to build, not just that, their own operating system and internet, but also their own GPUs and CPU to do it. And they are struggling. Yeah. And if China is struggling with that capability, the many other nations will probably struggle as well.
00:36:34:08 - 00:36:56:20 Unknown Going back to that use case example, I think that all use cases where there are things which a nation would probably want to say, I want capability to be guaranteed to provide this for my national survival, infrastructure, credibility and AI stuff. You could probably run on your own compute provider, energy supply to do it, but it's going to cost.
00:36:56:22 - 00:37:19:22 Unknown And I think that's the big challenge we've seen. If we talk about compute algorithm, data energy, the one that's hidden and seldom talked about is cost. Nations like that ability to be able to go and kick a bit of tin next door and make sure all their things are still green and it's all very good. They don't like the bill that comes with that, which says that it's going to cost you X amount per year to maintain it.
00:37:19:22 - 00:37:41:03 Unknown And one of the big decisions we're seeing at the moment around energy is energy cost. As a driver for data location, whether that's European nations suddenly realizing that it's much cheaper to use another nation's energy than their own energy, and therefore to say sovereign is important. But cost is also a factor. And therefore I'm going to not necessarily rely on purely.
00:37:41:05 - 00:38:08:21 Unknown But I think there are some use cases where you can put very bespoke critical systems into national and national stacks. But when 100%. No, I don't think you're not today, you certainly wouldn't want to be there. And you touched on sort of the competitive nature potentially even at a national level. How are you seeing AI changing this nature of competition between nations or even between organizations?
00:38:08:23 - 00:38:33:14 Unknown You know, how long have you got? So it's, this is one of those things that I spend all my time talking about. I think that today we are seeing AI warfare. There's loads of books written on AI warfare. You know, that. So I advise you on myself. And I'm lazy and therefore stopped after a while. But you know, but the the the idea that we seeing AI warfare today, we're seeing this concept that Ukraine is the future of warfare.
00:38:33:16 - 00:39:04:00 Unknown I think it's flawed. Yeah. I think it is a nature of warfare. It's evolved in the same way. As, you know, the tank evolved from 1916 to 1939. Yeah. We see this evolution of military capability to do what we do today. We're a little bit faster, better, smarter. The true difference that's happening is when we see AI, a genetic warfare, which is starting to be built where we have AI as a capability to fight different wars in different ways, at different paces.
00:39:04:02 - 00:39:29:16 Unknown So we don't have to fight a kinetic, physical battle space war. We are fighting a war against a nation and defeating that nation before the war even starts. This, you know, this concept of the seven minute walk, idea. You know, I generally, I generally believe that that shift, many people don't realize is happening, but it places AI not as a tool that enhances current warfare.
00:39:29:18 - 00:39:54:14 Unknown But I as the tool of warfare. That's a second shift. A second shift is this long and I suddenly critical for my national survival. And you could possibly look at that in recent conflict, where the initial phase of conflict hasn't just been the destruction of airborne, systems and early warning systems and air defense, it's also been cyber attack using AI capabilities.
00:39:54:15 - 00:40:29:07 Unknown And yet the third phase, which I'm more worried about, is that if you're a nation where you are competing with a country where AI is the distinct advantage they have over you as a military nation, then you need to have a fight for AI dominance and you need a totally different level of warfare. So if a seven minute war is this this notion a country could have superiority through AI, the worrying phase is when other countries start realizing we have to defeat that AI capability so we can survive.
00:40:29:07 - 00:40:58:11 Unknown Or when my master's degree was in revolutions, military fans, this is a revolution that people are starting to see in the same way as aircraft carriers. Tanks, trains, machine guns, horses and chariots change the nature of battle. We are seeing a revolution which is totally different for the wars that we fight today. And my last comment going back is getting those old ideas out of generals heads is far harder than putting new ideas into them.
00:40:58:13 - 00:41:17:19 Unknown We are still preparing to fight Ukraine as a type of conflict, and seeing that as the future definition dash. Tony, I feel like I can make you work today, so I'm going to give you a little bit of a breather. We're going to do a quick fire round. So if that's the way we're going to time it. So I'm going to ask you 5 or 6 questions that we have 30s to do this.
00:41:18:01 - 00:41:46:08 Unknown Whatever comes into your minds just go ahead and say it okay okay. So let's start. One word for AI today. Nervous. Oh, one words AI in five years controlling AI agents hype or real shift. We all shift. Okay. Biggest risk in AI right now. Leadership, understanding and lack of it. The biggest opportunity for AI right now. Leadership, understanding and lack of it.
00:41:46:10 - 00:42:13:16 Unknown It's that one thing leaders consistently get wrong. I can't say the third answer at the same time. I've started selfish, but for time I'll say exactly that. I think that they fear that leadership understanding AI is all about them, not next generation. Excellent. Okay, and one AI term that you would wish people would stop using, this year again to get sick.
00:42:13:18 - 00:42:37:07 Unknown I think I'm just going to say that, and I think the other one is gen AI as a generic. It's an I think Gen I have excellent. Okay. So, Tony, one of the things that you've spoken quite eloquently on is leadership when it comes to AI. Are there any traits or characteristics that, as leaders in defense, we need when it comes to the use of AI?
00:42:37:09 - 00:43:02:07 Unknown Yeah, I'm a product of Sandhurst, and Sandhurst is very much around traditional leadership values. Apply to modern, challenging situations. But ultimately Sandhurst always teaching a General Slim's concept that leadership is just plain. You. And it's about understanding yourself, understanding your people understand you working with and then being able to lead in those environments. And your AI is changing the AI.
00:43:02:08 - 00:43:19:13 Unknown Suddenly it's it's not just plain you, it's just plain you plus AI. And I think that leaders, especially in initiatives, are struggling with that concept to say, I don't understand AI. I don't understand, you know, I know what I want to do. I just don't know what the toolset helps me do or how to do it or what to do with it.
00:43:19:15 - 00:43:43:22 Unknown And so we end up with these, you know, leaders, not just military, but, you know, leaders, a whole who are very conscious, very worried and think that the leadership about AI is all about themselves and their command in a situation in today. And yet we're seeing AI changing so rapidly, capabilities that are taking six months to evolve from concept to effective capability.
00:43:44:00 - 00:44:04:14 Unknown And so if leadership is concentrated purely on today and themselves and their issue, they're missing the really big challenge of AI. And that really big challenge is about the next generation of leaders. You you know, we are seeing leaders today struggle, but they got their position pretty much by doing know. When I was in the Army, it was one day son.
00:44:04:19 - 00:44:25:08 Unknown And it was sometimes the infantry. One day son or this will be yours. Just do what I did. That's changing. We know that change because the leaders are speaking to us and saying, I don't know how to lead in this new environment. What about the next generation? And so really, the role of, you know, leaders today, military or anywhere, isn't deal with the situation today.
00:44:25:10 - 00:44:49:07 Unknown It's shaped that journey for the next generation of leaders because their journey is going to be so totally different. They are going to be playing with AI from day one. They are going to be using AI in ways that we didn't consider or can conceive. And more importantly, is going to be embedded into what they do and will be using AI to do all the easy stuff, the things that you and I learned and failed at and then, okay, that when they do again, they're going to be automated.
00:44:49:07 - 00:45:06:17 Unknown And so our next generation leaders are not going to have these learning experiences. They're not going to have leaders who are necessarily helping them through that because it's all new to them as well. So the real challenge for AI leadership shape the journey for the next generation, right? Yeah. Do you think that this next generation has almost like an inherent advantage?
00:45:06:17 - 00:45:27:02 Unknown I mean, I the other day my son came to me and showed me on his iPad that he'd built an e-commerce website in Shopify, and he's now selling stuff. Right. And he just did that in a couple of hours. It just becomes it's inherent to him. It's intrinsic. Is there are you seeing that this new generation of leaders that are coming through in defense kind of come pre equipped with their skills?
00:45:27:02 - 00:45:47:12 Unknown Or is there there's still a lot I think we often use shorthand about natives, digital natives, digital nomads and people like that. He. Yeah. Oh they've got an advantage because they were brought up with us. You know, we coded as kids. We saw I played the computer as a kid. We understand how computers worked and people say, oh, well, yeah, it's easy for you because you grew up it.
00:45:47:12 - 00:46:08:15 Unknown I've had to learn all this from scratch. And you know that that concept that, you know, once you hit 40, any technology is magic as opposed to technology, you know, I think is nonsense. You know, I know, you know, 70 year olds who quite happily using code with AI to build exactly the same situation, the same thing. So I can do this.
00:46:08:15 - 00:46:27:10 Unknown And they I didn't know how to code. For now I can do this. And I also know 17 year olds who have got no interest in AI, computers and stuff like that whatsoever. And so to like say it's a generational thing is it is is easy, but I think flawed. I think it's actually positive thing. And it goes back to that mindset.
00:46:27:10 - 00:46:50:00 Unknown How do you create and coach curiosity regardless of your age? I was speaking to a, a pilot from the US Air Force, retired, he flew in Vietnam, and he was talking about how he was using AI to help him in his job. Now is to act as a special advisor. You know, there's somebody he would look at and go, U.S. Marine Corps pilot from Vietnam era.
00:46:50:03 - 00:47:09:02 Unknown Probably not the person you think he's gonna be using AI. And yet he was. So I think we've got to start thinking that in the code generation, we have an advantage. What can I do with that? Yeah, but it's not exclusive. We can all start using AI in those ways instead of thinking forward into the future. Now, I'm thinking 22 years and beyond.
00:47:09:04 - 00:47:31:17 Unknown It's quite hard to predict beyond two years when it comes to AI, right? What do you see as the future for AI? Where is it going to be used? Where is it going to have value? Two years? Cool. I think it's let me give you three answers now. One. Where were you two years ago? Yeah. Whenever I speak to people, I manage lead.
00:47:31:17 - 00:47:54:14 Unknown It's like. Yeah, if you were going to say in two years time, this is where your performance is going to be, where you two years ago, and it's out of curve, you know, am I seeing this hockey stick which suddenly goes like that? And what's the evidence it's going to be hockey stick. I think it's time that I let's look where we were six months ago with, for instance, using AI to to find, you know, zero day exploits, for cyber defense, six months ago.
00:47:54:15 - 00:48:19:01 Unknown Failed to do so today, finding significant amounts, you know, growth methods, all that side coming out and saying, hear us on abilities which have been detected very quickly at pace. You know, the, AI Security Institute study found that, you know, it is successfully penetrating, controlling enterprise network systems, trial versions, which literally had flaws in them just for people start getting too worried, you know, three times out of ten.
00:48:19:05 - 00:48:38:12 Unknown But doing it well should take an expert 20 hours doing it in 20 to 30 minutes. And so I think if you look at six months, that pace of change is so rapid. So, you know, much as I'm an evangelist and love predicting the future and telling you what 2035 is going to be like, I also caution people to say whatever prediction we make for two years time is going to be wrong.
00:48:38:18 - 00:48:56:07 Unknown So start thinking about how do you cope with change. The unexpected kind of goes back to mindset. How do we start thinking about that rather than trying to predict the toolset we're going to be using and therefore saying it's going to do this, how do I adapt and change to it? Adaptability in flexibility is far more certain than having fixed technology.
00:48:56:07 - 00:49:15:05 Unknown It's changing. So that's the first answer. So I forgive me, but I'm going to answer three times. The second time I think that we're often going to see AI doing unexpected things. Now we can argue that that's something that's going to create new jobs, new opportunities, new ways of thinking. But one thing we can be certain about is that we're going to be using AI in different ways.
00:49:15:07 - 00:49:34:02 Unknown And yet, as we discussed, leaders are worried about the situation today. So I'd put that same question where are we going to be in two years? To every leader you meet and everybody that the audience meets and say, what are we going to be like in two years time? What does that mean? What does that go? What does that mean for me as an individual?
00:49:34:04 - 00:49:53:06 Unknown Often talk about becoming more aware about what I can do. I then start asking people to consider a day to day activities. Do they see that being use of AI and then become more engaged? We need to have more of a conversation, not just us, but everybody about where are we taking AI and what do we want it to do?
00:49:53:09 - 00:50:14:04 Unknown And now allow that two year question to be answered much more comfortably, because the whole of society will be answering it, rather than people who are really interested and talk far too much about it. And in the third bit, which I'd answer is I think the AI in two years time is probably going to be on the verge of I don't believe in artificial general intelligence.
00:50:14:04 - 00:50:35:15 Unknown I think that that is possible. It's probably going to be invented, but I in two years time is probably going to be doing things which are significantly harming society if we don't have that debate I've just mentioned. Yeah. So being able to predict it is hard. What I will say is that if we don't start thinking, how do we control it?
00:50:35:17 - 00:51:08:03 Unknown How do we manage it? How do we make sure that people using it have my trust as a member of the public, that they're using it safely, responsibly, with assurance? If we don't have that debate, then it will be doing things that are harmful and people will just be waking up and looking at them. When I was working, in Microsoft, you know, a decade ago, our biggest concern was that we created the equivalent of a stock market crash in 2007, and suddenly it became, we are making decisions which make that possible, not inevitable, but possible.
00:51:08:05 - 00:51:24:06 Unknown And so a third bit is in two years time, I could do really bad things if we don't start thinking about it today and doing something about it. So the lesson here is be aware, be prepared, have the conversation now rather than have it forced on you in the future. Get engaged. Understand what it could do for you.
00:51:24:09 - 00:51:49:08 Unknown Understand how it could impact you. Talk about it. So this video series is of course called AI Changes Everything. With that in mind, is there anything that I doesn't change or shouldn't change? Obviously you spoke a little bit about the preparation two years, but is there anything that comes to mind immediately? I'd be deeply concerned if we have another social media problem.
00:51:49:10 - 00:52:02:23 Unknown I think that my children are old and in their 20s. But I grew up in a social media age, and I think today it's very popular and common for people to go, I didn't realize social media is doing such harm and, you know, so bad for people. And we should ban it for 16 year olds.
00:52:02:23 - 00:52:33:03 Unknown And yet it's pretty obvious. Yeah, we could see that. We could see that this was perhaps unhelpful. It wasn't encouraging people. And with hindsight, we should probably have done more about it. So one thing I hope it does change is we start thinking, how do I use AI safely? Yes. How do my children use AI safely? And I think second thing that it won't change is human ingenuity.
00:52:33:05 - 00:52:53:20 Unknown I think it'll enhance it. I think it will definitely, in part replace it. You'll start giving ideas, suggestions at a pace. So humans have so much better than having to get 20 people in a room and brainstorm something. But I still feel that many things will be resolved by human ingenuity, not by artificial intelligence. Yeah, I totally agree.
00:52:53:21 - 00:53:17:15 Unknown I generally hope that that is the case, right? There is something to be said about the creativity of humans, and we must always preserve that. I product of the week. Tony, I thoroughly enjoyed speaking with you, but before I let you go, one of the questions I always ask is, do you have a favorite prompts, like a prompt of the week that you encourage, listeners and viewers to use?
00:53:17:17 - 00:53:35:09 Unknown I do, it's quite long. It's about 20 lines long, but I do want to share it on on screen. But can you describe it in which case. Yeah. So I couldn't paste it every Monday. It goes across all my emails, all my calendar appointments. And it very simply says, what have I missed? I shouldn't have missed.
00:53:35:11 - 00:53:51:22 Unknown But to do that accurately, it needs a lot of detail and knowledge, but then it prioritize it into, you need to do this now. You need to put some time aside to do this one. And this one you need to be aware of. And you probably need to go and speak to somebody about it. So that prompt has been a essential for me in the last.
00:53:51:22 - 00:54:06:17 Unknown I travel a lot, and so be able to put that in on a Monday morning and just say, what have I missed in the last way? You can prioritize it. For me, such a good. So that's a brilliant prompt. I'm going to use that one for sure. Excellent. As I said. So I really enjoyed speaking with you. We could go on for hours.
00:54:06:19 - 00:56:05:00 Unknown Best of luck going forward. Thank you everyone for tuning in and watching. This is just one of the interviews in the AI Changes Everything video series. If you're interested in watching more of and I encourage you to go to our Qualcomm for Telus AI changes everything. Thanks once again, Tony, and thanks everyone for tuning.
