Tristan Harris

So someone had just said they meant the technology and realized that the diameter alone of the size of the missile would essentially be enough to get a sort of a signal of what was going on in that missile and whether it matched the treaty, the terms of the agreement.

Beautiful example.

You hear the phrase all the time in AI governance, you know, trust, but verify.

And it's almost paradoxical.

If you're verifying, you're not really trusting.

And this phrase, you know, came from, I think it was a Russian proverb that President Reagan eventually adopted and popularized during nuclear negotiations, because he didn't want to say, you know, reduce your arsenal to this many nukes, but then I'm not going to check if you actually did it.

So what does it actually mean when we apply this concept to AI?

What are we trusting and what are we verifying?

Janet, just curious to hear your answer.

You're mentioning something really important, which is, you know, we believe that you need to have international coordination for a long time.

But if I said that just three months ago, you would have called me crazy.

I mean, look at the political forces in the world, China and the US ever talking about coordinating on AI.

That's never going to happen.

And it actually did happen at the Trump-Xi summit.

And it seems like mythos was the reason that this happened.

Do you agree?

So we have mythos, we have China and the US, they're expressing an interest to coordinate, but they don't trust each other.

What would be some of the infrastructure we need for the US and China to practically, and what are the risks that we're protecting against?

Because as you mentioned, there's some common infrastructure, maybe some differences if we're trying to prevent cyber risk and mythos level things versus preventing AI loss of control.

progressed.