Bridget McCormack

So I think it's actually already perfect for those disputes.

Yeah, I mean, it turns out in lots of industries there are documents-only disputes.

I was talking to an in-house litigation leader at an energy company, and they have supplier disputes that are all documents-only disputes, and it's probably perfect for those.

Payer-provider disputes, disputes between hospitals and insurers, which are, I'm sure you know, like an enormous docket.

It's probably...

Perfect for those if you can get them both to agree.

You know, time value of money means some people like to hold onto their money and they're willing to have a dispute resolution process take a very long time.

But those should be perfect for an AI dispute resolution process, right?

We should be resolving those quickly and getting people their coverage.

So I think there's actually an unlimited number of disputes for which this is appropriate.

There are also some for which it will never be appropriate.

I mean, this is just my view, but I believe that criminal cases, cases where the government is accusing you of something and wants to take your liberty as a result of that accusation, or cases that individuals or organizations or even businesses bring against the government should happen in public courtrooms and with publicly appointed or elected, if you're in state court, judges.

Those have to happen.

in courtrooms.

Yeah, I don't know.

It depends on the AI agent who built it, what their audit trail looks like, and how transparent they are about showing you what that audit trail looks like.

Let me go back for a minute.

I said payer-provider disputes.

I'm talking about disputes between healthcare, hospitals, and insurance companies.

Do you think there's a lot of confidence or trust in insurance companies?