Stephen Carroll

Anthropic is the biggest case study of late, right?

And just having returned from D.C., the position of many was it is not up to the companies how the government, particularly the defense arms of government, use the technology.

Your viewpoint on that, please.

Yeah, I mean, I would say it's the prerogative of any American to express their First Amendment rights.

And at the same time, we have systems to affect change.

We live in a democratic electoral society.

If folks are unhappy with the position of any given administration or a government composition,

There are plenty of tools at our disposal to effect change.

What I would say is these technologies aren't anything new to the US military or defense circles in general.

We've been using machine learning and AI capabilities for decades.

For now, it's starting to get a lot of attention in the media, particularly because of, I think, adjacent stories that have a tendency to get a dialogue moving.

For instance, the patchwork of regulatory frameworks and many hyperscalers being caught in that as well.

But I would say, in general, there's a dangerous notion that

of allowing boardrooms and private executives asserting too much influence in systems of government that have clear processes for change.

Joe, we just have 30 seconds, but the pace of innovation in AI agents, genuinely autonomous AI agents, how do you regulate for that?

I mean, I think right now we need to be thinking through a verticalized mindset.

There are a lot of platforms, ours included, that are trying to close the delta between generic models trained on mixed quality data and very sensitive enterprise workflows across private industry and government itself.

And so I would say applying an over-regulatory approach

to agentic workflows could be short-sighted in the grand scheme of a global competitive race.

Joe Scheidler, Helios CEO, great to have you on the show.