How Real Is the Threat of AI Replacing Humans?

I sent a letter to the White House with a list of my concerns about AI. We would like to have it on the right track. I received a response from the White House on April 17, so it's not affecting people, life, or jobs that bad. They have to understand the implication on the society, the implication on business, the implication of technology. The AI has a very powerful way of thinking and connecting. We don't want it to go to the level where it starts thinking by itself. And that is the area of the super AI, when the AI looks at the human as an obstacle for them. The fear here is, this is actually mentioned in so many of the hearings in the Congress, that the AI will create its own AI. The human is not involved in that cycle. That is the fear. That is the beginning of the super AI. With artificial intelligence, or AI, being inserted these days anywhere from a PDF file to a toothbrush to a death calculator, the development of this relatively new technology that is taking the world by storm is going at full speed and is being fueled by companies like NVIDIA, AMD, and OpenAI, right here in the Silicon Valley. Yet regulation and control are completely out of sync with the speed of development and become a major concern. Today, we sit down with Ahmed Banafa, Professor of Engineering at San Jose State University, an expert in AI and cybersecurity. He's an award-winning author and was ranked number one voice on AI by LinkedIn in 2024. He has been interviewed by major media on this topic and joins us in the studio today. This is Bay Area Innovators, and I'm your host, Steve Esposito. Professor Banafa, welcome to our program. Thank you so much for inviting me. Well, I want to talk to you about AI. There's so much hype about AI these days. So, first, can you please talk to us about a brief intro to what AI is and the three stages of AI and where we are right now? AI is a branch of computer science, which is basically having the machine or the computers will do some of the tasks. That can be done by humans. It starts very basic about doing simple tasks like reading, printing, answering questions. That is the basic thing about the AI. AI is an old idea. It's not a new technology. It started in the 1940s, but it advances through the years, and then during some of the period, it became a winter AI, which people just ignore it because there's no interesting outcome of that. Now, the three stages of the AI are the narrow and the general and the super, and the difference among all the three is very clear and simple. When you talk about the narrow, you're talking about the humans smarter than the machine or smarter than the AI, like Siri and Alexa. And then we move to the general, which is the human. Siri, what we have on the phone. The absolute Siri, the one that you have on the iPhone, and Alexa, the one that belongs to Amazon. And then you go to the general. The general is the one where the human and the AI have the similar intelligence, and sometimes one of them is better than the other on some task. And that's what we have now, which is the generative AI. That's what we call it. And then the super, which is in the future where the AI is smarter than the human, and that's coming years and years from now. So, next, please talk to us some of the concerns about AI and the development of AI that you are familiar with. There are technical issues and there are social issues. For example, the social issue is the jobs. People are going to lose their jobs. There's a lot of layoffs going on in the Valley with the companies because they found that the AI can do three things better than the human. They can do the task more accurate, faster, and cheaper. So, the CEOs of the companies, the managers look at it. I don't need 10 people here. I can only have three. Train them on a certain AI program. They can do the job of 10. And that's from the social part of that, the bias that we see in the AI. When you ask a question, they give you an answer that will be tilted toward a certain race or certain belief or certain political views. That's what you're worried about. And the third one is hallucination. Hallucination is if the AI cannot give you the answer, they don't know the answer, they start making up stuff just to make sure that the human is happy. So, that's from that part, which is the technical part of the AI. We are still at the beginning, and there is a reason for calling this one generative AI. The regular AI is the read the data and the process the data and give you some insight about it. This point connected to this point. The trend is going up and down. Generative AI is different. Generative AI, you train it on the data, and they start making up their own opinions, which could be completely different of what the data is talking about. They just start processing this and say, a better way of doing it this way. And this is where you see what we have now in the generative AI, the chat TV, for example. So, that opinion is based on some of the algorithms or programs that are put into the AI, right, which are subjective. Absolutely. I just wanted to have an idea about what kind of data they have. The chat GBT 3.5 was trained on something called token. Token is a piece of data. That's the technical term for it. 500 billion pieces of data. Chat GBT 4 on a trillion pieces of data. Gemini, which is the new AI for Google, is 5.5 trillion pieces of data. The huge data we are talking about that keep training and training, just educate the algorithm so it can have its own opinion about it. So, let's go one by one. As far as the job loss, people are saying that, yes, we will lose jobs now, but there's going to be replaced by AI jobs. Do you feel that's the case? Short term, we're going to lose jobs. Long term, we're going to gain jobs. The story here is the AI revolution is actually happening too fast compared to the other technologies. The latest technology, we talk about it for the past few years, was the blockchain and the cryptocurrency. Before that, we've been talking about things like Internet of Things, cloud computing, and before that, we were talking about the Internet itself. So, when we talk about AI, AI doubled the speed every six months and doubled the number of the companies every six months. So, it's very hard for people to catch up with that. The loss of the jobs will be a lot of steam when it comes to the short term. Over the long term, we're going to have new jobs that you never heard about them. It's actually created by the AI revolution. For example, prompt engineering, which is how can you train the program so I can talk to the program like I'm talking to you. Instead of having very specific words, it's going to understand it. Improving the communication with the machine. You know, ethics AI jobs that check to make sure no bias, no discrimination in the data. Having all these series of new jobs, which is not just one job. You're talking about every company should have it. They have multiple people to do that. That's going to be on the long term. Now, what about things like a deep fake? We talked about this earlier with you. If bad actors get involved in criminal activity, give us some examples of what can happen with deep fake. Well, deep fake is the generation of video that simulate or a real person that you know. It's actually using the data you feed it to the program and then whatever transcript you give that person or that avatar or that image or video, it's going to start reading that and start communicating with you as if it's a real thing. And there are really a lot of cases where the tool, which is the AI, can be used by bad actors and good actors, bad people and good people. It's like the car. You can use it for delivering patients to the hospital. People can use it to commit a crime in a runaway car. So it's a tool. So the bad actors, they found ways, which makes it so easy for them to get into cyber security crimes and to act in a way, which is we never heard about it. And I'll give you some examples. There was a famous case in Hong Kong where this banker, he thought he was in a Zoom meeting with the personnel or officers from his company. Basically, they are created by deep fake, and they convince him to transfer $25 million to outside the bank. And the only thing for him to figure out that this is wrong was he received a text message from the real person, and he was confused about it. How can he be in front of me and I receive a text message from him? Another one is Elon Musk. Somebody created a deep fake of Elon Musk and convinced this poor lady in South Korea to give him $50,000. The richest person in the world asking for $50,000. It makes no sense, but this is how convincing is that. Another story about it, which is really hitting home here, is the robocall that created by AI in the voice of President Biden in New Hampshire, where people start receiving calls saying, don't go and vote. I mean, it's not going to change anything. You're going to win. So some people actually thought that this is the president telling them to stay. So the FCC banned these kind of robocalls that it is fake one, fabricated one. And this shows you that where is the truth and where is the fake. And now with the AI, there is no line between them. You can be going between them very easily. Now, no one really owns this technology, right? So bad actors can use it for bad things, if it's North Korea or China or whoever. We'll talk later about regulation. But do you have any examples where you actually see this taking place that some bad actors used AI in a way that created damage? You know, it depends on the level that the country is going to use and what they're going to use it for. You know, one of the things that the United States is trying to do is to get the feedback from the private sector, from the companies that created the generative AI. You know, I believe that there is no way for us to have our head wrapped around the whole case of the generative AI and the impact, whether it is at the national level or the international level, without having three parties getting together and sitting to the same table and talking, which is the government is one, the private sector, which is those tech companies, and also the civil rights organization. That will be the voice of the people saying, we're concerned about privacy, we're concerned about security, we're concerned about our safety. Civil rights. Civil rights organization. Because if you leave it for the companies, what you are technically trying to tell them to make less money, because they want them to be careful about their product. You're not going to do that. There's billions of dollars in that market. The government did not understand it that much. They don't have the people who are really up to that level to understand what is the implications. They're very slow in regulations and in the law. So the civil rights is very concerned about this. So once you bring them together, now we are talking about three parties talking to each other. Now, just to give you an idea, but Europe is ahead of many of these initiatives. They have something called AI Act, and the AI Act is very specifically, and it's very simple. It has four elements, and the elements, one of them is we have to label the AI tools. For example, this one is dangerous. This one is acceptable. This one is okay. Or they have like the color code we have for the warning. And then it's an opt-in, not an opt-out, which means if I'm using your data, I have to let you know that I'm using your data in the training. The other thing is that the communication between the companies about anything wrong with their product, that will be needed in this case. So things like this, when it comes to the EU, the European Union taking action in this by themselves and say we have to do something about it, it's very important to make sure that the AI is safe. Next, I want to ask you a more philosophical question. So probably it was a few months ago. I was in San Francisco, Chinatown, and there was a Waymo self-driving car that gets stuck right turning somewhere in Chinatown. And there's a lot of pedestrians, so it didn't know what to do. It was just waiting there for a long time. I actually have a video on my Twitter. You can see it on February 9th, how the car is sitting there and cars are honking, right? And then just two weeks later, I did a business trip to Boise, Idaho, and then from the airport to the Airbnb, we had a driver, an Uber driver, who chatted quite a bit during the trip. He was from Ethiopia. He was telling me how he moved to Boise and his experience and all these things, right? So if they haven't happened that close, I wouldn't have paid attention, but they were so close to each other, and I realized how impersonal and bothersome the first one is and how interesting the second experience was, right? So the question is, what's the ultimate goal for getting the self-driving cars and all of this? It's going to reduce the number of jobs, and even if they work perfect, it will still have some issues. So what's the goal, you think? The future is driverless vehicles. There is no question about it. Yes, of course, we're going to lose this experience of interacting with humans and talking to humans while you're driving, which is, they tell you their story, you tell them their story. It's an enjoyable part. The key thing about driverless cars is the benefits, it's coming from the fact that people are going to feel safe because you are not with another human. It's going to take you from point A to point B, and you're done with that. The problem with it now, it's still not ready for prime time. There is a lot of things going on with the software and with the hardware available. The Waymo have 40 cameras, you know, just looking around and making sure and processing the data. But to understand how cars like this will act, they run through scenarios, and definitely there will be a scenario where they never thought about it, which is a human being, you know, they act in different thousands of ways. So they get to that situation where they take the safest way, which is if you are not sure, stop. That will be, you know, the command to the car saying, if you're not sure about anything, just stop. Human will take care of it, or listen to somebody. Instead of acting or driving or going, you know, forward without knowing what's going on. San Francisco is a very tough city when it comes to testing driverless cars. Cities like Miami, Phoenix, you know, Austin, and I know all those cities, they're flat. So driving there will be much easier because you have a very specific route, and they can just go back and forth without any issues. San Francisco is different. You're back in about seven hills that you have to go. A lot of people there. Traffic is really challenging for this. The Waymo, I mean, Alphabet or Google is pushing for this, and they managed to regain the permit so they can drive again in, you know, or the permission to drive again in San Francisco. They even extended to the peninsula so they can drive over the 101 so it can go all the way to Sunnyvale. Even though there's some resistance from the locals, they say, well, we're not safe. If the car is driving 20 miles, 35 miles, it's okay, but if it's driving 65 miles an hour, that's going to be really tough to make any decisions. My concern is the last thing I want to see, the last thing I want the companies to do is to use our highways as their tracks to test their cars. This is something that's unacceptable, you know, in this case. And until they sharpen that software, getting that feedback, have a better hardware to run to done that, the limitation of the drive, the time, and the delivery is needed. You know, here's another thing about it. Kids, you can take, you're working, so you go to work and then one of those drivers' car can take the kids to school without you worrying about they're going with strangers in those cars. Students who go to prom or go to parties, you know, in the high school, you can have just driverless car and that's going to take them without somebody driving the car and those, you know, some of them will be in a bad situation. It's going to help. It's going to solve some of the issues where give people some kind of assistance and help in this sense. And it's an option. A lot of people, you know, like you, you're going to say, okay, you know, I prefer to have a human being that I can talk to him or her and some people will say, I want to try the driverless car. I tried one of them and, you know, I don't want to talk to anybody, for example. You know, so I have the iPad in front of me. I can run the music I want and can do all these things and I'm fine with that because I'm doing something while I'm doing it. So it's an option. It's not the only option. It's one of the options that's going to be available. You're an expert on cybersecurity and AI and you've been named the number one voice on AI by LinkedIn in 2024. Please talk to us about some of the regulations or some of the things that you're involved with to help regulate this new technology. You know, I communicate with the White House multiple times. You know, the last one was six weeks ago. I sent a letter to the White House with a list of my concerns about AI. Very specific, you know, clear message, you know, and asking, okay, Mr. President, you issue an executive order in 2023, which is to make sure that there is some kind of regulation, the companies has to, you know, to make some decisions and, you know, communicate with the government, communicate with each other. What is the next step? I received a response from the White House on April 17th telling me exactly what they have and they gave me a link of something called Bill of Rights, which is AI Bill of Rights, talking about the blueprint of what will be the rights for people, what will be the rights for the companies. And the letter, I think, is on your LinkedIn. Absolutely, I have it on my LinkedIn. The interesting thing is that two days ago, three days ago, the federal government announced, you know, a federal board of 22 members. And those members are really a mix from different parts of the society. They have the CEO of NVIDIA, EMD. They have the CEO of OpenAI. They have CEO of Google and Microsoft from the tech side and Cisco, also the CEO of Cisco and Amazon Web Services. And from the other side, they have some people from the United Airlines. They have some people from, you know, I think Lockheed or Boeing, you know, to talk about. And they have three or four people from civil rights organizations plus the government. They have the head of that one is the head of Homeland Security, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and there are certain people from the government who is involved. So exactly what we're talking about. So very high profile people. High profile. And this is exactly what we're talking about, the three parties we're talking about, which is the government, the private sector, and the civil rights organization. There are 22 members. Their job, their first meeting will be, you know, this month, and they will give recommendation to the White House. And this recommendation will be the basis for, you know, regulation, a litigation, and they can just push this one to the Congress because now it's coming from the expert. It's not just one party giving their opinion. The government is talking or the private sector is talking. They're getting together, and then they're getting to find a common ground. And they say, okay, this is what we would like to recommend for the next one. Of course, the challenging part is, as you mentioned, when you talk about people in Congress who actually make these decisions, most likely they have to rely on some intern who has some tech knowledge to even understand what they're talking about, right? That is true, and this is why this board can answer questions. Let's say that they have recommendation. They can bring them to the Congress, and they can ask them, why did you say that, or let us know about what's going on. Explain that to us. The congressmen and women, they don't have to understand the AI, deeply understand the algorithm. They have to understand the implication on the society, the implication on business, the implication of technology. One clear message I got from, you know, from all the letters that are sent to the White House, that the United States will never stand in front of the wheel of technology. We're going to make sure it keeps going. We want to be number one in the world when it comes to AI. We are ahead of so many countries. We don't want to stop that. We're going to slow it down. We would like to have it on the right track, so it's not affecting people, life, or jobs that bad. We would like to make sure that we have some tight rails that they can follow. I think in your own words, you mentioned the train has left the station already. Now we just got to make sure it's going safe, and it doesn't hit anyone. What other regulations can be put in place? You mentioned the red teams before. Yeah, the red team is a term used in the industry, which is the last step before you release any product or service. So what you do is you seek the advice or the check from insider in the company and outsider from the community, where you invite them to check this product. Of course, there is the NDA, which is you make sure that they're not releasing this information. And they ask them, what do you think about it? Did we miss anything? Is this something that we should be worried about? And then they get this feedback. And this is one of the actions that's taken by some of the companies to make sure that when they release the product, they cover all the bases. We talked earlier about an experiment done by the Air Force with AI. Please tell us about it. They have a simulation about a drone that's run by AI, and there's a lot of the research and application of AI with the Department of Defense because this is really giving them an upper hand in so many levels. They can have fighters without pilots, which save lives. So this drone was programmed to go after the enemies. And to understand how significant is this, I don't have to tell the drone about who's my enemy. I have to program it on a certain data that will define the enemy for me. And they can go and do the task, and they're done with it. But they're trying to experiment with this, so they have this simulation where there's an officer that's tracking the drone to go to the target. In the middle of the flight, the officer decided to abort the mission by saying, abort, abort, you're done. The drone refused to do that and went ahead and hit the target and then came back and hit the tower where is the officer in the simulation. And when they tried to audit and to look at what's the reason, the answer from the drone is, or the AI on the drone, the human stood in my way to finish my mission. We don't want to do that. We don't want it to go to the level where it starts thinking by itself. And that is the area of the super AI, when the AI looks at the human as an obstacle for them. I'll give you another example about this one. There was an experiment by Google, and they teach the AI five languages. And it was really successful, and they talk about it in the media. But later on, they found that the AI actually learned a sixth language, which was not planned. So they tried to ask people, did you ask the AI? They said, no, we didn't ask the AI. So they found that the AI found this language is fascinating and learned it on their own. And they said, okay, I love this language. So now instead, why do you want to make that decision? Because now you trained me in five. Well, I want to learn more. I want to see what is the sixth language I can learn. This is the risk that we see. And those are the flashlights or the flashpoints we see about the super AI, when they start making decisions without going back to us. The fear here is, and this is actually mentioned in so many of the hearings in the Congress, that the AI will create its own AI. The human is not involved in that cycle. That is the fear. That is the beginning of the super AI. And I think an example to this is the movie iRobot, right? The 2004 movie with Will Smith that talks about these robots that go out of control and do their own thing. How likely is that, and what can we do to avoid that path? Well, I mean, I love that movie. I've seen it at least 22 times. Every time I watch that movie, I see something different, especially in the light of what we are seeing now. This is the future of AI. When you talk about Sunny, which is that robot that has emotion, dreams, and understand, and have some feelings, and they don't want to die, all of these things, this is the super AI. So introducing the emotions and the decision about, you know, I have feelings like you, human, and you have seen Will Smith say, no, you're not. You're a can. You know, they call it can. You know, basically, you are a piece of metal. That is the point where we're going to enter the era of super AI when the machines start making some emotions or having some emotions. There are so many movies that talk about, you know, talking about those AI, the machines that today start thinking of themselves and start being aware. This is called self-awareness. That's the highest level of intelligence, which distinguishes us as a human from the machine. We're worried about this because how far you can go with this. Remember that the AI has a very powerful way of thinking and connecting. They can go to the web. You know, Vicky in the same movie, it's an example of a bad AI actor where they can go and try to kill Will Smith in that movie. Why? By changing the traffic, you know, pattern there by closing the tunnel or doing something like this. This is really looking at the future. 20 years ago, this movie told us what's going to happen in 2020. There is a scientist who wrote an article saying that in his opinion, the reason why we don't see other advanced life, or at least we haven't found other advanced life form in the universe, is because he thinks a lot of civilizations reach this point of AI and then somehow they destroy themselves as a result. Any thoughts on that? I mean, I hope we're not going to get to that. I mean, the Terminator is another message to us, which is the key thing about the Terminator, which is really intriguing and interesting is they go back in time. It's not just destroying what you have in the future, what we have now. They're going to say, OK, we're going to go to the root of the resistance. We're going to go and eliminate the source so we can change the sequence of time. That tells you how the AI can think about it. They're not going to think like us. They're going to think in a way where there is an easy way of doing it. And remember that the AI is doing things more accurate, faster, and cheaper. And they say, instead of going and fighting all those people, I can go to the root cause of this one and just turn the switch off, get this one, and all of them are going to disappear from that era. That is the problem with the example about the civilization. Destruction of the civilization, all the civilization, we are aware of that. We know that. We learn our lesson thanks to the movies, thanks to the scientists who talk about it. That's why the concept of a kill switch is very popular in all the literature of the scientists. A kill switch is not a hardware one that you can turn it on and off. It's a program that you can initiate that program, and that program will destroy the big machine like what happened in the iRobot when they stick that program. It went inside the heart of Vicky, the AI, and stopped it. So the kill switch is always there. You should have plan B and C and D just in case the AI is going out of control. Sam Altman and the other ones, they want to address the issue from the beginning because they saw the experience with social media. Talk to us about that. The hearing that we have seen in 2023 about bringing the CEOs of AI, and especially Sam Altman, and he's a very smart guy. I give him all the credit for that. Talking to him about the danger of AI, he realized that he has to be preemptive and proactive in this action. They don't want to have the same story as the social media where everybody is happy with it at the beginning, and then they realize there is a dark side of it. He said, okay, regulate me. Help me regulate. So he's open to that. He's open for that, and that's why he joined this federal board. They say, okay, I'll be there in the federal board, so I can give my voice telling you that our product can do this and this and this. What's the impact on the society? And he was clear about it in front of the Congress, and that's a different tone from what we have seen from companies like Facebook or Twitter or X where it's a defensive style. Now it's after facts. They don't want to have a Cambridge Analytica situation like we have in 2016. They want to say, no, we don't want to have that. We're open for regulation. We're open to having some guide rails that will help us. We're going to create teams that will check the products, and that's helped him a lot gaining friends, not here in the United States only, also outside when he went and visited different countries to calm them down about the fears of AI. Do you feel NVIDIA and AMD share his concerns, or they're more focused on getting to market first? I can't speak for them because for them they are one part of the AI story, and without open AI their product is not as hot as everybody is talking about it. For them the focus is to make sure that the company is doing well and also the shareholders are happy with it, and they're not dealing with the software. They're dealing with the hardware, like the example we talked about it with. There are three things that's fueling the AI revolution, which is the data. We have tons of data compared to 10 years ago, and we have the hardware, which is the NVIDIA and AMD and Intel, and we have the algorithm, which is the talent we have. We have to have all of them so you can have this AI revolution, and each one of them is a whole group by itself. You're talking about the algorithm, you're talking about the hardware, and you're talking also about the data. So for them the focus is more on better products, and one of their concerns, this is something I heard from them, especially from NVIDIA, is to lower the energy consumption of the hardware because it's really consuming a lot of energy, and they try to make sure it's more effective and faster. Like the latest chip, which is the B200, is 30 times faster than the H100 that's used in the industry, and it's more optimized in the energy. So now be friendly to the environment. Make sure that you do your part of that, part of your message about AI. And you also mentioned how all the AI companies are pretty much focused on San Francisco. That's the starting, that's ground zero. Do you see other areas in the Silicon Valley expanding or having more control? San Francisco has always been the ground zero for tech companies. Even the starting point was in San Francisco and then branched to other cities. Now there is an area in San Francisco where you have the top 20 companies of AI in the world just concentrated there, and that's helpful in talents, in interaction. It's much easier if you are in the same area. Cities like San Jose, they're trying very hard to attract AI companies by giving them discount on their permits and giving them break in the fees and helping them settle here and telling that this is not far away from big companies. You are about 20 minutes from Google, you are another 10 minutes from Apple, so you'll have all the talents around you. The Bay Area in general is the AI land where you find yourself that within a few years, we're going to see that the companies start moving to different cities. Why? Because of the availability of the talents, the commute, the breaks they give them on the tax or the break they give them on the fees. So we're still at the beginning of the revolution. The revolution of AI is still at the beginning. What we are seeing now is just a sign of what's coming in the future. And I'm glad that it's happening in the Bay Area. It's happening in the San Francisco Bay Area because we've always been the leaders. Two years ago, everybody said, let's go to Texas, let's go to other states. And I have friends in all those states. But I heard this music before, I've seen this movie before, where they try to have another Silicon Valley, another country, another state, and there's only one Silicon Valley, which is here. And one last question is, what do you think is driving this technology nowadays? What's driving it is actually, number one, is the fact that the AI can do things accurate, more accurate, faster and cheaper. So people look at it and say, I can do multiple things instead of doing just one. It's going to help me, you know, cut into the steps. In the past, you go to Google and you search and then you start editing and then you bring it together. This is all gone. Companies see a lot of money in that. Because that is a driving force of the market for the AI can add trillions of dollars by 2030. Why? Because of the productivity and the efficiency. And also for the government is who owns the AI actually control the world because you can have your military up to the level of the AI where other countries don't have it. Some of the recent reports, I read one this morning talking about robots. Instead of soldiers, you can send robots with AI. You don't have to worry about, you know, controlling them. You just give them the mission and because they train on this one, they're going to go and finish it. And you don't even have to have a GPS to find the coordinates. They can look at the terrains around them and the landmark and decide where is the enemy and go after the enemy. They can decide who is that enemy. So we can just release, you know, the fighters, the robots and all of them, they can do their job. And that's going to give that country, you know, the upper hand. And the Department of Defense, the United States is really working very hard to make sure that they maintain this kind of a gap compared to the rest of the world. You think super AI is five to six years from now? You know, it's a very difficult question. It's the $6 million, $60 million question. I could say that five to 10 years ago, you know, if we didn't get the Chad GBT in 2022, the reason for this is all the studies before the Chad GBT came to the market in November of 2022. What we are in now is supposed to happen in 2040. So we're ahead of time by 20 years. So we could be talking today and somebody already reached that level of super AI. Nobody talked about it. So, you know, you can look at it as 10 years from now, but you have to have your mind open about somebody can find a way to make sure that the algorithm has some kind of sentiment and feelings. And now we're going to go to the next. It's not going to be like a big thing about it's going to control everything. But now it's exactly what happened. You're going to start with the Chad GBT, similar Chad GBT, and it's going to start to grow in with the application of the applications. 2023 was knowing the AI. 2024 applications of AI. That's what we see. You know, everybody's talking about how can I use this one in my business? Now, we don't know what's going to be in the coming years, but there's everybody's working on AI. You know, the number of the companies, the money that's spent on AI in the valley and outside the valley is tremendous. They are putting 40 million, $40 billion, $42 billion, just to make sure that they are leaders and they are. And I'm going to end with this one. In order for you to be a leader in the AI, it's not a complicated equations or ingredients. There are three things. You have to have the data. You have to have the hardware, which is from NVIDIA or AMD. And you have to have the talent, which is the programmers. You know, I was giving a presentation to a group of Ferrari engineers two weeks ago. And to tell them how the AI compared to their car or their product, I tell them that the data is like the gas, the fuel. The hardware is like the car. The algorithm is like the driver. You cannot run the car without all of them being together. And if you have the best car, if you have the best fuel, if you have the best driver, you're going to be ahead of everybody. Professor Ahmed Banafa, expert on AI and cybersecurity. Thank you so much for joining us. Thank you for having me.