NOW, THE HISTORIC RAPID RESPONSE ON THE VACCINE AS WE SAID WAS A GAME CHANGER.

OUR NEXT GUEST SAYS THAT IT ALSO SHOWS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF GOVERNMENTS USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO HELP THEIR CITIZENS.

NOW, JOSH TIHP RANGLE IS "THE WASHINGTON POST" A.I.

COLUMNIST AND HE EXPLORES ITS UNTAPPED POTENTIAL BY GOVERNMENT FOR HIS LATEST ARTICLE.

AND HE'S JOINING WALTER ISAACSON NOW TO DISCUSS THE BENEFITS.

>> THANK YOU, CHRISTIANE AND JOSH TIRANGLE.

WELCOME TO THE SHOW.

>> MY PLEASURE.

>> YOU'VE BEEN WRITING THESE COLUMNS ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR "THE WASHINGTON POST," AND YOUR LATEST TALKS ABOUT THE ABILITY OF A.I.

TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND CRIMINALS.

GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF THAT.

>> SURE, WE HAVE THIS SORT OF FOUNDATIONAL EXAMPLE THAT WAS OPERATION WARP SPEED.

SO AS PEOPLE MAY NOT RECALL EVEN THOUGH IT WAS QUITE RECENT, THE ENTIRE REASON WE WERE ABLE TO PRODUCE AND DISTRIBUTE VACCINES TO ALL 50 STATES AT THE SAME TIME IS THAT THERE'S A GENERAL NAMED GUSS PERSONA APPOINTED TO OVERSEE OPERATION WARP SPEED AND SHOWS UP IN WASHINGTON WITH REALLY NOTHING, NO PLAN, NO MONEY.

HE HAS THREE COLONELS, AND HE DOES THESE SERIES OF CONVERSATIONS TO FIGURE OUT HOW HE'S GOING TO OPERATIONALLIZE IT, AND IT TURNS OUT THE ANSWER IS A.I.-DRIVEN SOFTWARE.

WHAT A.I.-DRIVEN SOFTWARE IS ABLE TO DO AT ITS BEST IS OPERATIONIZING.

THE CHALLENGE FOR WARP SPEED WAS NOT JUST TO BE CONNECTED TO ALL THE PHARMACEUTICAL MAKERS BUT TO THE TRUCKERS, TO ALL THE STATE LEVEL AGENCIES, ALL THE HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS, ALL THE PHARMACEUTICALS.

SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THOUSANDS OF DIFFERENT DATA INPUTS.

AND SO PERSONA SITS DOWN, AND ULT MATLY HE NEEDS A.I.

DRIVEN SOFTWARE TO INGEST ALL THAT DATA IN A CLEAN WAY AND TURN IT INTO A APP, SO YOU CAN ACTUALLY MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON INFORMATION.

THAT IS VERY COMPLICATED THING.

REDUCE IT FOR A SECOND.

THINK ABOUT PLASTIC, RIGHT, AND YOU'RE TRYING TO GET VACCINES TO EVERYBODY.

WELL, YOU CAN MAKE THE VACCINE, BUT WHAT IS THE NATIONAL STATE OF OUTPUT AND PRODUCTION OF PLASTIC, RIGHT?

SO JUST THAT ALONE PUT THE VACCINE INTO VIALS, REQUIRES A WHOLE VISION OF THE CAUSE MOWS.

AND SO WE DID IT, AND IT WORKED.

BUT OUR POLITICS KIND OF BURIED THAT EFFORT IN THE REARVIEW MIRROR.

AND WHAT I TOOK AWAY FROM THAT IS WHAT IF YOU COULD OPERATION WARP SPEED THE ENTIRE GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS?

>> BUT TIM'S OPERATION WARP SPEED, WE HAD A MAJOR ADVANCE IN A.I.

WHICH IS LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS AND GENERATIVE A.I.

THAT CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS, DO THINGS.

HOW WILL THAT HELP AFFECT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?

>> I THINK A.I.

HAS HAD SOME OF THE WORST PR YOU COULD POSSIBLY IMAGINE FOR TECHNOLOGY, THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT.

THE STAKES ARE INCREDIBLY HIGH FINANCIALLY FOR COMPANIES DRIVING THEM, AND NOBODY STOPPED TO EXPLAIN AT ITS BASICS A.I.

IS MATH.

IT IS LARGE AMOUNTS OF PROBABILITY DRIVEN AROUND LANGUAGE AND STRUCTURED DATA.

AND IT TURNS OUT THAT WHILE, YES, SOME LARGE LANGUAGE MODEL WILL ELUCIDATE.

IF YOU HAVE A SERIES OF CODES AND YOU CAN TALK TO THE IRS WHETHER YOU DESERVE AN EXEMPTION FOR THIS OR THAT, THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT DELIVERY, WHAT TO DO WITH THEM.

AGAIN, STRUCTURED DATA TURNED INTO LANGUAGE IS PERFECT.

AND SO THERE'S THIS COMMUNICATIONS LAYER THAT PRIVATE INDUSTRY HAS BEGUN TO FIGURE OUT, WHICH IS 24/7.

IT'S NEVER SHUTDOWN, YOU CAN DO IT IN ANY LANGUAGE, AND IT PROVIDES A LEVEL OF SERVICE AND INTERACTION THAT IS REALLY GOOD.

AND WE DON'T REALLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT AT THE GOVERNMENT LEVEL, AND THERE'S A COUPLE REASONS.

ONE IS, YOU KNOW, ON THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE, IT MEANS THERE MIGHT NOT BE AS MANY PEOPLE WORKING FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE FUTURE, AND THAT IS A SACRED COUNT FOR DEMOCRATS OBVIOUSLY FOR POLITICAL REASONS.

ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, UNFORTUNATELY, IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF REPUBLICANS ARE INVESTED IN IMPROVING THE ILLEGITIMACY OF GOVERNMENT AND THEY DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT STRONGER AND RESTORE IT.

THESE ALMs ARE PERFECT FOR THESE MEDICAL PROVIDERS.

>> YOU TALK ABOUT HOW THESE LLMs, THIS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WILL HULUSINATE AND YOU TALKED ABOUT SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS LIKE FOOD STAMPS.

I HAVE STUNNED TO READ IN YOUR PIECE THAT NOWADAYS HUMANS GET IT WRONG 44% OF THE TIME WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SNAP BENEFITS.

DO WE JUST HAVE TO SHOW A.I.

WILL BE BETTER THAN HUMANS RATHER THAN SHOWING IT WILL BE PERFECT?

>> YEAH.

I THINK THERE'S THIS SORT OF FUNDAMENTAL THING WE NEED TO EMBRACE, WHICH IS WE ARE DEFENDING A STATUS QUO NOT WORTH DEFENDING.

SO FOR ALL SORTS OF EMOTIONAL REASONS, WE DEFEND THE STATUS QUO.

IT'S NOT GREAT.

WHEN 44% OF HUMAN-DRIVEN DECISIONS END UP IN THE WRONG DECISION SNAP FOR SNAP ELIGIBILITY, AND THAT'S FOOD, RIGHT?

THERE ARE PEOPLE GOING HUNGRY OR GETTING BENEFITS THAT DON'T DESERVE THEM, DO WE THINK AN ALM OR A.I.-DRIVEN SYSTEM CAN DO BETTER THAN THEM?

FOR SURE.

WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS NOT HAVING A.I.

MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT OPERATIONALLIZE THE INFORMATION SO HUMANS CAN DO BETTER.

>> I WAS ON THE BOARD WITH THE FORMER GOOGLE CEO AND CODE FOR AMERICA HAD GENERAL PARKER, AND YOU WRITE ABOUT THAT WHICH IS IT'S NOT JUST A.I., IT'S GOVERNMENT CAN'T DO SOFTWARE.

EXPLAIN WHY GOVERNMENT HAS PROBLEMS PROCURING SOFTWARE.

>> THE THING ABOUT SOFTWARE IS THAT SOFTWARE STARTS AS A SORT OF ABSTRACT IDEA, WHICH IS WE'RE GOING TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT WILL BE FLUID AND RESPOND TO USER DEMAND AND USER SERVICES, AND IN THE SOFTWARE INDUSTRY THERE'S A SAYING.

SOFTWARE IS NEVER DUMB, RIGHT?

SO TRY TELLING A CIVIL SERVANT WHO IS GOING TO GET RAKED OVER THE COALS THAT, NO, NO, NO WE NEED YOU TO APPROVE APPROPRIATIONS AND PROCUREMENT THAT WILL NEVER BE DONE.

IT'S A CHALLENGE, AND ON TOP OF IT OUR SYSTEM HAS ONLY GOTTEN MORE COMPLICATED.

WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE, MORE SPENDING, AND WE INSERT TOOLS AND REGULATIONS, WE NEVER TAKE THEM OUT EVER BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY DULL AND UNGLAMOROUS WORK, AND IT'S HARD TO DO.

SO WHAT WE END UP WITH, AND THE GENERAL WHO'S BRILLIANT AND TAUGHT ME THIS THROUGH HER MIND, YOU GET THIS LOOP OF UNCERTAINTY AND DYSFUNCTION, AND IT STARTS WITH PROCUREMENT RULES THAT ARE TORTUOUS AND ABSURD, AND THEN YOU HOLD PUBLIC SERVANTS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ABILITY TO ENFORCE PROCUREMENT GOALS, SO WHAT YOU END UP GETTING IS YOU EITHER GET ABSURD OR REALLY BAD SOFTWARE, OR THEY TAKE A CHANCE AND THEY END UP IN FRONT OF CONGRESS, AND EACH CYCLE OF THIS DRIVES MORE GOOD, SMART PEOPLE OUT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THEN YOU RINSE AND REPEAT.

AND THAT'S WHY AS ERIC SAID TO ME BASICALLY SOFTWARE -- GOVERNMENT IS THE PERFECT ENEMY OF SOFTWARE.

SO WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY GIVEN THAT SOFTWARE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT NOUN IN THE AMERICAN BUDGET, WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO GET THE GOVERNMENT TO ACCEPT ITS ROLE IN PROVIDING SOFTWARE.

IT MEANS THERE ARE SOME RISKS, AND AS YOU'VE SEEN RIGHT NOW POLITICS AND RISKS DON'T GO VERY WELL.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT JUMPED OUT IN YOUR PIECE FOR ME WAS THE V.A., THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION AND ITS HOSPITAL.

AND THERE WAS A STUSTATISTIC THAT MADE MY HEAD SNAP, WHICH WAS 18 VETERANS PER DAY COMMIT SUICIDE.

AND YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW A.I.

CAN MAYBE HELP THAT PROCESS, BUT EXPLAIN TO ME IS IT SOMETHING LIKE PSYCHOLOGICAL ISSUES, SOMETHING WE REALLY WANT HUMANS, THE EMPATHY OF HUMANS TO DO?

IS THAT SOMETHING A.I.

CAN HELP US DEAL WITH?

>> 100%.

WE WANT TO FREE HUMAN BEINGS TO ACTUALLY SOLVE HUMAN PROBLEMS.

I THINK EVERYBODY WOULD AGREE WITH THAT, BUT THERE'S A COROLLARY TO THAT STAT, WHICH ProPUBLICA DID INCREDIBLE WORK.

LOOKING AT THE D.A.

'S OWN REPORTS.

IF YOU'RE AN AMERICAN THAT HAS ANY SORT OF PATRIOTISM TO JUST A GUT WRENCHING DEGREE.

AND THE REASON AGAIN IS THE SYSTEM IS INCREDIBLY COMPLICATED.

YOU'RE LOSING TRACK OF WHO HAS WHAT CONDITION.

SO MUCH OF THE WORK THEY'RE DOING IS MANGLED LET ALONE WHAT'S NOT DIGITAL OR FUNCTIONAL.

WE HAVE TO GET TO A PLACE IF WE REALLY VALUE OUR VETERAN AND THEIR SERVICE, THEY RECEIVE A GOD VIEW OF THEIR OWN CARE.

THEY DESERVE TO BE ABLE TO LOG IN AND LOOK AT WHERE THEY ARE.

AND SOMEONE ON THE OTHER END SHOULD BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THEIR FUNCTIONALITIES AND SAY THIS IS PERSON WHO HAS PTSD, HOW FREQUENTLY ARE WE CHECKING IN?

AND I WOULD SAY AN ALM THAT SAYS HOW ARE YOU FEELING TODAY IS NOT A BAD THING.

ANY SORT OF PARASOCIAL ENGAGEMENT THAT CAN LADDER UP IMMEDIATELY TO A HUMAN WHEN YOU DETECT DISTRESS IS A POSITIVE.

I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT BECOMES THE COUNSEL BY ANY MEANS, BUT THE SYSTEM IS SO BROKEN ANY SORT OF TRACKING CAN GET THAT NUMBER DOWN.

WHAT I ALSO SUGGEST IN THE PIECE AS I SAID SOFTWARE ISN'T BUILT.

YOU START FOR ONE SMALL USE CASE AND LEARN FROM IT.

AND WE OWE VETERANS THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN AND WORK WITH THEM FIRST.

AND SO LET'S SOLVE THAT PROBLEM.

YOU KNOW, IF JOE BIDEN WAS GOING TO GIVE A "STATE OF THE UNION" ABOUT A.I.

AND WE WANTED TO SORT OF TAKE OUR MOON SHOT, WHY DON'T WE REDUCE THAT NUMBER OF SUICIDES BY HALF THE NUMBER?

COULD WE DO IT?

WE MANUFACTURED AND DISTRIBUTED VACCINES IN SIX MONTHS, SO I THINK WE COULD.

AMERICANS RESPOND TO BIG CHALLENGES, AND IT'S COMPLICATED.

A.I.

IS A VERY TECHNICAL SUBJECT.

PEOPLE HAVE NATURAL FEAR AND CONFUSION AROUND IT.

WE NEED TO SET A REALLY, REALLY BIG GOAL AND SEE IF WE CAN ACCOMPLISH IT.

AND THEN I THINK PEOPLE WILL UNDERSTAND THE VALUE OF WHAT A.I.

CAN DELIVER IN OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS COULD DO IS COULD ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT TAXES IF YOU CALLED UP SINCE YOU CAN'T GET AN IRS PERSON ON THE PHONE.

IT COULD DO FOOD NUTRITION BENEFITS, IT COULD DO SOCIAL SECURITY.

AND IT COULD PROBABLY MAKE THE JUDGMENTS EVEN BETTER THAN HUMANS COULD DO YOU DESERVE THIS, WHAT COULD THE BE THE RESOLUTION OF THINGS.

DO YOU THINK PEOPLE COULD ACCEPT HAVING MACHINES MAKING THOSE DECISIONS RATHER THAN HAVE A HUMAN TALK TO THEM?

>> I THINK THEY WILL FOR SURE.

I THINK WE'RE A COUPLE YEARS AWAY FROM THAT HAPPENING ANYWHERE, AND TAXES IS A GOOD EXAMPLE BECAUSE IT'S MATH, RIGHT?

THERE'S A SERIES OF INPUTS, THERE'S A LIMITED AMOUNT OF DATA, AND YOU HAVE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT A CORRESPONDING REGIME OF RULES THAT IS INCREDIBLY COMPLICATED.

I PROMISE YOU, YOUR TAXES IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS, IF YOU'RE USING ANY OF THE BIG SERVICES, THEY'RE GOING TO BE DONE BY A.I.

THEY JUST WILL BE.

THE PRIVATE FIRMS ARE GOING TO MOVE TO IT.

SO THE IDEA THE GOVERNMENT WOULD TAKE PART IN IT, MAKES NO SENSE.

IF YOU'VE GOT ALL THESE INDIVIDUALS USING A.I.

TO FILE TAXES, MAYBE WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS CENTRALIZE A.I.

AROUND THAT TAX REGIME SO WE DON'T ALL HAVE TO GO TO OUR INDEPENDENT, VERY EXPENSIVE A.I.s TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE OWE.

>> LET ME ASK YOU THE REALLY BIG QUESTION ON A.I., IF IT'S GOING TO INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY ENORMOUSLY, DOES THAT MEANS IT ENDS UP DESTROYING MORE JOBS OR CREATING MORE JOBS?

>> IT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION.

I THINK IN THE SHORT-TERM MOST OF THE ECONOMISTS I TALK TO SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN A THREE TO FIVE-YEAR PERIOD THERE'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE DRAMATIC CHANGE SO EVEN THE BUREAU OF LABOR STUSTATISTIC IN JOBS YOU THINK WOULD BE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY WHICH ARE THINGS LIKE TRANSLATORS AND DESCRIPTIONS THEY DON'T SHOW THOSE DESCRIPTIONS BUT TEN YEARS OUT THEY DO SHOW THOSE CATEGORIES BEING ERODED TREMENDOUSLY.

A LOT OF OPTIMISTIC ECONOMISTS WOULD TELL YOU THAT'S GREAT.

WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS MANY TIMES WHERE A MASSIVE NEW TECHNOLOGY COMES ALONG AND IT ELIMINATES JOB CATEGORY AND NEW JOBS ARE CREATED.

AND EVERY SINGLE TIME WE GO THROUGH THE CRISIS OF FAITH, WELL, WHAT IF THIS TIME IS DIFFERENT?

I'M VERY SENSITIVE TO THE FACT WE DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT IF WE LOOK BACK AT PREVIOUS CHANGES, INDUSTRIALIZATION, EVEN THINGS LIKE TRACTORS, WHAT YOU'LL FIND IS IS THAT, YEAH, WE END UP LEVELING OUT.

WE CREATE NEW JOB CATEGORIES WITH EACH THING.

I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE'S CONFUSION AND WORRY ABOUT A.I.

IS GROUNDED IN THAT, RIGHT?

AND I AM VERY AWARE WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT, OH, A.I.

CAN ELIMINATE DRUDGERY, YEAH, THAT SOUNDS GREAT UNLESS YOU PUT FOOD ON THE TABLE THROUGH THE ACT OF DRAUJRY.

AND SO THIS IS WHY -- YOU KNOW, MY WHOLE THING IS REALLY WE'RE NOT HAVING THE APPROPRIATE CONVERSATIONS AROUND WHAT THIS TECHNOLOGY CAN DO BECAUSE, UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE NOT IN A PLACE WHERE MATURE CONVERSATION WHERE IT'S WHAT OUR POLITICS PROVIDE BECAUSE WE REALLY NEED IT BECAUSE THIS STUFF IS MOVING VERY QUICKLY.

AND IT IS GOING TO START IMPACTING PEOPLE'S LIVES -- YOU KNOW, IT ALREADY HAS, BUT IT'S GOING TO IMPACT WHAT THEY BRING HOME IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS, NEXT TWO YEARS, NEXT FIVE YEARS.

>> A LOT OF PEOPLE EVEN IN THE A.I.

INDUSTRY AND CERTAINLY A LOT OF POLITICIANS KEEP CALLING FOR MORE REGULATION OF A.I.

IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE FRIGHTENED OF, GOVERNMENT TRYING TO REGULATE IT AND IF SO WHAT TYPES OF REGULATIONSED WOULD YOU SUGGEST?

>> WE HAVE NO REGULATION AT THIS POINT SO I WOULDN'T BE FRIGHTENED OF REGULATION.

BY THE WAY, THIS IS NOT STRICTLY ABOUT A.I.

WE DON'T HAVE A FEDERAL DIGITAL FRONT.

IT'S STATE BY STATE, AND SO WE'VE BEEN WAY BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL ON THIS.

PRIVATE INDUSTRY IS OBVIOUSLY -- WHILE SOME PEOPLE ARE OUTWARDLY SAYING PLEASE REGULATE US, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE BEHIND THE SCENES SAYING AS LONG AS THEY KNOW, LET'S MOVE AS FAST AS WE CAN.

I'VE HEARD A COUPLE OF IDEAS ABOUT REGULATION SOME OF WHICH IS ABOUT TRAINING DATA AND WHAT ARE PEOPLE USING TO TRAIN THEIR A.I.

AND HOW CAN WE MAKE SURE IT'S NOT DISCRIMINATORY AND NOT STOLEN FROM CREATORS, SO THAT'S ONE AREA.

ANOTHER AREA THAT'S SUPER AMBITIOUS IS IN ORDER TO DO LARGE SCALE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WORK, YOU NEED VERY EXPENSIVE CHIPS.

AND SO THERE'S SOME PEOPLE WHO TALK ABOUT SHOULD WE HAVE A KIND OF ATOMIC ENERGY SORT OF REGIME THAT ACTUALLY KNOWS HOW MANY CHIPS EACH COMPANY HAS AND HOW MANY CHIPS EACH INDIVIDUAL HAS?

BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING NASTY WITH A.I., YOU'RE GOING TO NEED A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF COMPUTING POWER, AND CHIPS ARE FIZZKLING, RIGHT?

IN THE SAME WAY URANIUM OR PLUTONIUM IS A PHYSICAL ITEM, THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE SUGGESTING WE REGULATE THE AMOUNT OF CHIPS PEOPLE HOLD.

AS ALWAYS, THE EUROPEAN UNION GOES FIRST.

THEY'RE VERY GOOD AT GOING FIRST, AND AMERICAN COMPANIES WILL TELL YOU THEY'RE TOO DRUDONIAN.

MY QUESTION IS WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR.

>> WHEN YOU SAY WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR AND YOU SAY WE'RE BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL ON REGULATIONS, MAYBE THAT'S WHY WE'RE AHEAD OF ANY OTHER COUNTRY ON DEVELOPING A.I.

>> IT COULD BE, THOUGH I'M NOT SURE WE ARE AHEAD OF EVERY OTHER COUNTRY.

WE DO -- I BELIEVE IPPRIVATE ENTERPRISE AND IT DOES -- COMPETITION IS GREAT.

AT THE SAME TIME YOU LOOK AT THE STATE RUN REGIMES, YOU KNOW, CHINA IS DOING VERY WELL ON A.I.

ABU DHABI HAS A STATE RUN ALM.

I DON'T THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING A HAND BRAKE ON THE GOVERNMENT BUT THERE'S NO REGULATION RIGHT NOW.

WE DO NEED TO GET SOMETHING ON THE BOARD PARTICULARLY AROUND PRIVACY.

THERE HAS TO BE WHEN YOU LOOK AT DEEP FAKE AND ALL THESE THINGS THAT CAN BE CORROSIVE TO PEOPLE'S LIVES AND THE TRUST OF TECHNOLOGY, YOU'D THINK WE CAN GET SOMETHING BASIC ON THE BOARD BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR.

>> WHAT DO YOU THINK OF PRESIDENT BIDEN'S EXECUTIVE ORDER ON A.I.

AND JUST IN GENERAL HOW THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS DOING?

>> YOU KNOW, I THINK THEY'VE DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB ON THE FACTS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF THEM.

I THINK THERE'S A MULTI -- HUNDRED-PAGE EXECUTIVE ORDER THEY DELIVERED.

AND IT'S REALLY SMARLT.

IT'S COMPREHENSIVE AND ACTIVATING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND HOW A.I.

IS GOING TO EFFECT EACH DEPARTMENT.

THE OTHER THING SMART ABOUT IT IS DOESN'T TREAT ALL DEPARTMENT AND ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS WEEK WALE.

A LOT OF THE STUFF HAS BEEN DELEGATE TODAY THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE WHO REALLY UNDERSTANDS THESE ISSUES, HAS A TON OF FAITH AND TRUST IN PRIVATE INDUSTRY BUT ALSO REALLY UNDERSTANDS THIS STUFF.

I DO THINK THEY'VE DONE WELL TO ENGAGE.

I THINK THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF, YOU KNOW, HAS DONE A NICE JOB OF CALLING OUT THE COMPROMISES TO ELECTION SECURITY AND PRIVACY THAT A.I.

IS CAPABLE OF.

WHAT THEY HAVEN'T DONE AND WHAT REALLY NOBODY INVOLVED HAS DONE IS SKETCH OUT THE BIG VISION OF WHAT A.I.

IS GOING TO MEAN FOR SOCIETY AND WHAT IT'S GOING TO MEAN FOR THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF.

>> JOSH, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> MY PLEASURE.