Reunion 2026, Part 1: ND Perspectives: Guardians of AI Innovation

Episode Topic: ND Perspectives: Guardians of AI Innovation

Artificial intelligence is no longer a distant concept; it is actively reshaping how we live, work, and connect right now—whether your daily life is high tech, low tech, or completely unplugged. But as this technology accelerates, who is ensuring it ultimately serves humanity? Claim your front-row seat to the future and unpack complex issues like data privacy, massive marketplace recalibrations, human autonomy and ethics. Bring your most pressing questions to this panel of faculty and alumni experts for discussion and audience Q&A. You will leave with renewed clarity on how the ND family is a force for good in the digital age.

Featured Speakers:

• Dolly Duffy '84, Executive Director, Notre Dame Alumni Association, University of Notre Dame
• Adam Kronk '02, '09 MNA, Director of Research and External Engagement, Institute for Ethics and the Common Good, University of Notre Dame
• Nitesh Chawla, Frank M. Freimann Professor of Computer Science and Engineering, Lucy Family Director for Data & AI Academic Strategy, Founding Director of the Lucy Family Institute for Data and Society, University of Notre Dame
• Gina Ayala Claxton '01, Corporate Vice President, U.S. Retail & Consumer Goods, Microsoft
• Heng Xu, Professor of Information Technology, Analytics, and Operations, Mendoza College of Business, University of Notre Dame
• Josh Zavilla '11, Head of National Security, Palantir Technologies

This podcast is a part of the ThinkND Series titled Reunion 2026.

Thanks for listening! The ThinkND Podcast is brought to you by ThinkND, the University of Notre Dame's online learning community. We connect you with videos, podcasts, articles, courses, and other resources to inspire minds and spark conversations on topics that matter to you — everything from faith and politics, to science, technology, and your career.

• Learn more about ThinkND and register for upcoming live events at think.nd.edu.
• Join our LinkedIn community for updates, episode clips, and more.

Transcript

Dolly Duffy 0:00

Thank you, but I like to think of myself really as just the glue that helps hold the talent together. I'm, uh-- Good morning, and welcome to ND Perspectives. I'm Dolly Duffy, the executive director of your Notre Dame Alumni Association, and I can't tell you how thrilled we are to have you here today. As you know, uh, ND Perspectives is one of the most signature events of Reunion, where we discuss the biggest and most thought-provoking issues of our day from a variety of expert opinions. Perhaps the most

Welcome

Dolly Duffy 0:30

thought-provoking issue of the-- our time right now is the advent of artificial intelligence. AI isn't a far-off concept anymore, although for me, I have to tell you, some days it feels like that. But it's here, and whether we realize it or not, it's touching each of our lives, actively reshaping how we live, work, and interact with the world. This technology is evolving so fast it's nearly impossible to keep up. Yet it comes with so many unanswered questions about how we as humans handle complex issues like data privacy, disruptions to the labor market, human autonomy, and so much more. Luckily, we've started to answer these questions, and as you know, just two weeks ago, Pope Leo released his first papal encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, providing moral guidance to bishops, clergy, and the faithful on safeguarding the human person in the time of artificial intelligence. In his opening words, the Holy Father asserts that humanity must make, quote, "A pivotal choice, either to construct a new Tower of Babel or to build the city in which God and humanity dwell together." It's not a choice between a world with or without artificial intelligence, but between a world that uses AI at the expense of people and one that up-upholds the magnificence of our humanity. After the encyclical's release, Notre Dame President Father Bob Da-Dowd called it a profound gift, a teaching that reminds us that every human life possesses an inviolable dignity, that safeguarding this dignity must be the foundation of every decision we make as we develop and apply artificial intelligence. And the good news is Notre Dame is already doing this work. You may know that in December, the Institute for Ethics and the Common Good received a $50 million grant to help fund the development of the Delta framework, a deep faith-formed approach that will provide practical resources for scholars, religious leaders, tech leaders, teachers, journalists, young people, and the broader public to help navigate these challenges we are facing right now with AI. The leadership of Pope Leo and Notre Dame at the dawn of this new technological age gives me hope that the moral progress in our development and use of AI is possible, and we're pos-poised to make that reality, uh, that progress a reality. So today, we have an impressive lineup with us, bringing expert viewpoints to help us understand AI, including faculty members confronting these issues. And, and I have to tell you, this is a star-studded panel. It's-- So this is a real-really the way to delve into AI, and we're excited about it. And to lead us in that discussion is Adam Cronk, the Director of Research and External Engagement at the new, uh, Institute for Ethics and the Common Good. So get ready. We're gonna cover a lot of ground. Get your questions ready, and Adam, take it away.

Meet the Panelists

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 3:45

Good morning! Thanks for getting up relatively early today, especially if you were out either at the Backer or Roars or wherever it was last night catching up with your, your classmates. As Dolly mentioned, my name is Adam Cronk, and I work at the Institute for Ethics and the Common Good. It's the administrative home for the Ethics Initiative here on campus, and it's just one of the initiatives that is working on and thinking about every single day, uh, among other issues, the ways that artificial intelligence is being designed, developed, and deployed. Uh, next to me is, uh, my actual neighbor as, in my neighborhood as well, Nitesh Chawla, who directs, uh, another strategic framework initiative, and that is the Initiative on Data, AI and Computing. And, uh, to-- And I will also say, uh, Nitesh is one of the top twenty-five data scientists in the world. He, uh, you've been at Notre Dame for- Twenty years. Twenty years. Um, and, and, uh, I, I know him personally. His, his son went to a school that I used to run and is now a student here at Notre Dame. Um, and, uh, so it's a pleasure to have you here today as well. To Nitesh's left is Hung-- Oh, no, it's not Hung Chou. It's, it's Gina Claxton. Gina, uh, class of, uh, '01 from Notre Dame, so it's a celebration year for her as well. I got to know Gina when we were working on the, the framework that Dolly mentioned, which is this DELTA framework. It stands for dignity, embodiment, love, transcendence, and agency. And it's a lens through which we believe people of faith and people of goodwill can and ought to look at the role that technology plays in their daily lives and in their careers. And when we were developing this framework over the past couple of years, uh, we had lots of benchmarking calls, and then we actually did in per- in-person focus groups throughout the country. We did one in Silicon Valley, and that's when I met Gina. Gina is the senior vice president at Microsoft. And as you'll hear in her remarks, uh, she spends a lot of her day working with companies on how they will implement artificial intelligence, what it will do to their workforce, their culture, their strategies. And so we're very grateful that she flew all the way out here today, uh, to be with us. To Gina's left is Hung Chou. Uh, this is, this is Hung's first year, uh, as a faculty member at the Mendoza College of Business in the Department of Information Technology, Analytics, and Operations. We call it ITAO. Um, I did have to look that up a couple times this morning to see if I could get those. I- We just say ITAO on campus. Um, and, and Hung works specifically, uh, on data privacy and, and what is swirling around from an, from an ethical perspe- -ective as it relates to that, and how that may or may not impact the way we view ourselves. So it's spot on to have Hung here today. Our institute also has, uh, uh, uh, the Notre Dame IBM Tech Ethics, uh, Lab, and we ran an event in, in, uh, Manhattan last fall at their f- their new flagship facility, and, and Hung was a part of that, and did a, did an absolute stellar job. And one of the things I'll ask Hung to, to tell you about to kind of stir up the feels of, like, it's good that Notre Dame exists, is as a, as an established rockstar scholar, the impression that her students have made on her in the way that they are thinking about and, and asking questions about, uh, this technology has, has really blown her away. And, and I'm sure it won't be a surprise to all of you, but we'd love to hear. And then to Hung's left, we have Josh Zavila. Josh is a class of 2011 undergrad, uh, came out from DC To be with us. He works for Palantir and has a lot of experience, I would say, rolling up his sleeves and doing, and doing the, the messy work of figuring out the trajectory of this technology specifically, um, how, uh, how it's being built. And one of the things he said to me on a prep call, uh, that, that I think is, is a, is a really worthwhile, uh, point to keep in mind as you start hearing Josh's remarks, is that it's so cool that we can all vibe code and we can make things ourselves with artificial intelligence. And yet, privacy and security, some of these foundational matters, if they're not built into the foundation of everything we're building, you cannot effectively just layer them or sprinkle them on top and expect good things to happen. And so, uh, that's the kind of point that, that Josh is here, uh, to, to make and help walk us through. So I'm going to begin, um, by, by, uh, asking you a question, Nitesh, which is, we hear, uh, Notre Dame use the terminology being a force for good a lot. And, um, I'd love to start by highlighting, um, you have led the Lucy Family Institute for Data and Society for-- You were the founding director, um, of that, uh, before now taking on this, this whole initiative. And I would say the bread and butter of, of what Lucy does all day, every day, is make sure that, that the powerful technology that's being developed also benefits those who don't have economic means, those who might be on the margins. And so can you just tell us a little bit about that work, how you think of it, and also maybe a couple of, of moving examples of the ways that, that your work has helped AI benefit humanity?

Nitesh Chawla 9:42

Thank you, Adam, and, and, and thanks for the generous introduction. Uh, thank you, neighbor. Um, uh, although I would say that when my son went to La Lumiere, where Adam was a principal for, he was a motivating force. Two years later, he leaves La Lumiere. So we would think he should be removed here from the school. Sorry about that. But, but he b- he had an amazing experience and, and I'm so grateful, Adam, that you were an influence to him- Sure to join that school. Thank you. It was an amazing, and you, you built a great institution there. So congratulations. And welcome, all everyone. I would love to know whether it was Bacchanal or Rose last night. How many were backers though? There we go. All right. Now we are ready to roll here. Uh, so as, as, as Adam said that I wear a couple of hats here, and, uh, I have the, uh, honor of being the, uh, founding director for the Lucy Family Institute for Data and Society. And then I also lead the Data and Computing Initiative, and very recently, uh, the same, uh, generous couple, Rob, Bob and Sarah Lumpkins, uh, endowed the directorship of the initiative. So I hold the Lucy Family Director for Data and AI Academic Strategy. One thing about academics is we love to hold titles, so I'm on that conquest, although the best, most honorable title I got this year was ND parent. So that's the most endearing one to me, um, uh, of anything else that I would do, uh, or have. I've been here for 20 years.

RISE AI Framewor

Nitesh Chawla 11:06

So at the Lucy Family Institute, what... And with the backdrop of now even the encyclical, something that Pope Leo says in the encyclical, this technology is not morally neutral. There are biases, there are prejudice, there are decisions that we may not trust. But he also, what I thought was the most powerful thing within the encyclical is he challenges us to bring together the theological principles with the technological principles. So think about when he made the announcement, he had the co-founder of Anthropic standing next to him. What he is saying is, the message he's conveying to us is, it's not that this technology is evil, it's how we may use, how we may deploy, what good we may get from it. That needs a bit more discernment. We have to em- we are going to embrace this technology. It is here, right? Anthropic, uh, is gonna have the biggest IPO, so it is here. OpenAI will follow suit. SpaceX will follow suit. So these technologies are here. So this is where I believe Notre Dame has a very distinctive purpose in how we think about how we bring, uh, the, the p- the Catholic social teaching principles and bring the technological innovation principles and unite them in pursuit of the answers that we need to get to. And that's what my job is. That's what I love being here. That's, that's the biggest gratitude I have to be at Notre Dame, is to be able to be at the interface of these questions for the last 20 years. So, um, at the Lucy Family Institute, we have been thinking about, uh, a broad, uh, platform and framework that we are developing. It's called RISE AI, Responsible, Inclusive, Safe, and Empowering AI. And, you know, within this responsibility, and even if you think about what the encyclical says, it's the human who's accountable. We think about AI or algorithm should be responsible. There's no mathematical function of responsibility, is it? If there's no math for responsibility, there's no calculus for responsibility, how do we optimize an algorithm? So it's the human who's developing, building, deploying, and using has to understand what those principles are. Inclusive, are all the voices in the world represented in the AI development? Imagine someone in a small community in Kenya speaking in Swahili. Imagine someone in Vietnam. Imagine someone in Chile or Mexico speaking Spanish, but there's different forms of Spanish that change. So is that language, that dialect represented, although they would be consuming it in the development of AI? Are they safe? Are they predictable in their functions? And most importantly, in the end, I believe, and that's the question that Adam was also asking to share some examples, have we truly empowered? Who is empowered at the end of it? Can we see that individual, just the organization? And if we think about all our work from those four dimensions within the institute and the initiative, we can imagine what kind of curricular, what kind of leaders we produce from Notre Dame who can have the responsibilities. Can we be at dif- all the places in the world because we w- we would be, we are, our mission says to be the best global Catholic research university. That means global has to be in the work that we do. While we are doing some amazing research and scholarship, global has to be. So how do we sort of be present there? So a few years ago, I'll share an example of what that global means and what is, how these principles of RISE apply. I was in Mexico City. We have many of these projects, but I'll give you this particular example. And we were on the street. I was there for another project on, we had to publish a major study in Nature at that time with some data from São Paulo, Brazil, on how psychological markers are as important for nutritional intervention to overcome child malnourishment. It became a, a s- a, a standard s- it's a study that has become a standard in, uh, malnourishment using data AI. So we were in Mexico looking at an not-for-profit organization, and, uh, Angelica Garcia Martinez, who was with this organization, took us to a hospital, a pediatric cancer hospital. It's on El Doctor Street. And as I was walking down that street, she told me, "Nitesh Uh, stay quiet. Don't say a word. Just I'll talk to you loudly in Spanish, you keep nodding your head. I don't speak any Spanish. I've been working in Spanish-speaking countries for a long time.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 15:42

Hmm.

Nitesh Chawla 15:43

And I said, "Why?" She said, "Oh, if they see that you're not from here, you speak English, you could be a target." Target for what? Well, kidnapping. It's that kind of a street. And as I was walking down... And imagine she's telling me as a brown-skinned man walking on the street in Mexico City. And so as we walked on, I see women and children sitting outside. And in my mind, I'm thinking, "If I could be a danger, can't these women and children be kidnapping and trafficking?" And they are bringing their child, child there to get treatment for pediatric cancer.

Josh Zavilla ’11 16:17

Hmm.

Nitesh Chawla 16:18

So then we basically go in, and I ask the hospital what's happening. Why are they waiting outside? The hospital went and showed us this thick, a ream of paper file. This is the largest pediatric cancer hospital, no electronic medical records. So when a child presents themselves, they have to admit that child while they go and get the paper-based record, look at the child, decide what treatment needs to be done, or if a treatment needs to be done, or an emergency room bed has to be occupied. While that is happening, families are lined up outside So then we said, "Okay, what's going on?" So now that hospital, five years later, it's been... I mean, that was the most moving experience I've had in my life, is the first, is maybe, in my opinion, the world's AI-first hospital. We took every paper archive record that they had. We scanned it. We used language models that we all use to create a record, medical record for them. We digitized their intake process, and not only we have seen how the physicians are empowered, not only we are seeing how the children and families are empowered, we built a communication system. We built a triaging algorithm. Um, and we are being inclusive because we are trying to get all the dialects that these families talk in. We are being safe. We're making sure how it's, uh, no data is ever leaking to anyone else. It's five years of work to understand. We engage with the, the medical interns at the hospital who label the data for us. And now, as I said, we also have to do great science. I would walk home easily with just sleep at peace thinking about how we have empowered those families. This has become the largest, longest study of all types in how social determinants of health and clinical data come together to have, and we can see how the interventions and outcomes can be measured. No one else in the world has done a study like this. So we will have amazing papers, but at the same time, we know there are families and physicians getting affected, and everything is using AI. Everything. So if you think about the impact on a human life, Notre Dame shows up at their doorstep and says, "This is a problem that needs solving and that must be solved." And that is why, in my opinion, Adam, we are an absolute force for good.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 18:44

Yeah. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you, Nitesh. That sounds like, uh, the next fighting. What would you fight for?

Attendee 1 18:52

Thank you.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 18:53

I, I, I'll bet you'll, you'll see a commercial on that, uh, during, during the football game, uh, th- this fall. What would you fight for? Um, and I know, and I know personally that that's just one of, of dozens and dozens of examples.

Faith Driven Tech Leadership

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 19:06

Let's, let's turn to Gina. Gina, you've built your career at, at one of the most influential companies in AI while staying deeply rooted in your personal faith, in Notre Dame values. How do those experiences shape how you lead, and what are the convictions you'd stand firm on even in a very fast-paced moving tech environment?

Gina Ayala Claxton ’01 19:31

Well, thanks Adam, and it's been, uh, a privilege to collaborate with you and get involved in Delta. Thanks all for, for having me. Um, I guess this is a bit of a personal question in that, uh, for me it starts with the foundation of faith, um, and the truth that God created every human in his image and likeness. And then from there, that comes with rights, that comes with dignity, that comes with agency. Um, so then being, you know, formed by Notre Dame in those years, that, that question, what would you fight for? How do you go fight for that truth? That's the challenge and call I feel, uh, as I have the privilege really to be working in this industry. Um, and, and I am very grateful that I get to work every day with, uh, with builders, um, leaders who are very purpose-driven, um, largely seeking to do good with this technology. Um, obviously that's not everyone, but largely, um, and yet the one thing I know for sure is we don't know a lot. And what I've learned over the last couple of years is I feel a responsibility, accountability, as do, um, many of us, right? Uh- To ask the tough questions. One, um, one thing that I know is there's a lot of noise about these topics, a lot of, uh, assumptions made. And so the first thing I've, I've decided to do is ask really tough questions in areas that of concern that I feel might compromise any of these foundational truths. And then from there, decide what I'm going to fight for if there's something. Um, and this is a continuous motion because it changes every day. Today is June 5th. If I feel comfortable tomorrow, I should feel uncomfortable again. I'll give two examples of that. Um, one is in this area of, uh, building data centers in communities, a very hot topic right now. Um, and there have been tremendous voices that have impacted than innovation, um, to solve these problems. But the people that built the technology in the beginning didn't know the problems necessarily existed. So you kinda can't see around the corner. Then all of a sudden there's this huge problem with water Um, there's a huge problem with electricity. There's a huge problem with, with labor markets and community, communities feeling disenfranchised and, um, lack of skilling, and all of these problems that start to stack up and create these very loud narratives. Important to me to go to the facts, unpack it, um, and, and what we-- with, with the voices in the company and in the communities really, um, actually just last week, Microsoft announced a, a five-part plan for AI infrastructure. It's an AI infrastructure community plan. In terms of water, we will recycle water, um, consume less than we give back. We are now using in the latest data centers in Milwaukee and Wisconsin, four swimming pools worth of water. That's about the amount to run a small restaurant in a year. Um, and you fill the data center once, and it runs for ten years. This is an example of innovation that happened because the problem was exposed, but then people asked tough questions and, and then decided to fight for it. Uh, electricity, the plan includes, um, we will overbuy, overbuy what we need, and in the Michigan Data Center, we're returning two X back to the grid and offsetting any cost to the citizens. There's a piece there about community partnerships and labor unions and skilling plans. And why I say that is it's this, it's this challenging, um, the facts challenging where we see things that kind of go against these truths and then exposing the problems so that then humans can do what we do best, which is our ingenuity, our innovation, our creativity to solve them. Um, I didn't have anything to do with that one, but really voices in the company and communities together have. And I'm very, very optimistic that these problems will be addressed. It's just that they weren't known, right? They weren't known. A second area that's more near and dear to my heart, um, being a mom of three, is this area of responsible AI. Um Transparency of AI, security, uh, equity, um, how, how it's being applied, how it's being used, what my kids can have access to, um, this idea of, uh, companions in our machines and all the unhealthy implications of that. There's a lot of worries that we all feel about those types of things. So at Microsoft, I've gotten involved in the responsible AI, um, kind of policies, some faith-based groups there. And just to be a voice, really, again, to ask questions. I don't build the technology. I was an arts and letters major, okay? So I do not build the technology. Um, but, but to be a voice, uh, in the room and just ask a lot of questions and then take it out into the world and, um, and really hold us accountable. I had the privilege of going to the Vatican last year, um, on behalf of Microsoft, also as a Notre Dame grad and as a mom and a wife and a, a citizen, just to-- uh, as Pope Leo was starting to kind of gather all his inputs for what would become this encyclical, um, Microsoft was one of the founding, uh, members of the Rome Call for AI Ethics. So just bringing those principles in and starting the dialogue of what, what role should a tech company play in that. So I think, um, it's, it's really the full integration of, of, of us as humans, faith, um, principle, experiences, and then, uh, the place where we work coming together in this opportunity, and I'm just-- I'm privileged to be a part of it, a tiny, tiny part. Um, but learning that voices matter so much in these new problems that are being exposed, but then the solutions that are-- become possible. So...

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 26:08

Thank you, Gina.

Gina Ayala Claxton ’01 26:09

Thank you.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 26:16

Gina also serves on the board of a great Catholic high school in Marin County called Marin Catholic, and, uh, after p- being a part of this focus group put me in touch with their principal, and they're now in a cohort of, of a dozen Bay Area high schools that are getting together and trying new things in the classroom and trying on the, the, this framework in kind of everyday practical application. And so thank you for that connection and also just the, the notion that in our professional lives and in our, in our volunteer capacities, uh, this is, this kind of cuts across all

Teaching Privacy and Ethics

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 26:53

domains. Hong, I'd love to turn to you. Uh, you come at this work from a very specific angle. What are the most salient dimensions from your research and your teaching, um, when it comes to preparing the next generation to not just grow the bottom line, but as they say in Mendoza now, grow the good in business? And, and what have you noticed about the students that gives you cause for hope?

Heng Xu 27:19

Yeah, thank you for asking the question. I know we had a casual chat, and Adam, you asked me, right, "How is your first year here?" I just wrap up my first year here, and before this, I had 20 years of teaching and research experience at other three different universities, both public and private. So I told Adam that it's completely different, and he asked how so. I said, "You know what? This spring, I just wrapped up my teaching for a total of 92 students for the class called Ethics of Data Analytics." And I told him that, you know, this is not a complaint. This is such a kind of, uh, a praise for how many students on campus are actually wanting to learn about ethics of data, how to better protect our privacy. In the past, before coming to this institution All the classes I taught are always elective, and I always like, you know, had the luxury only teaching five or 10 students who signed up for my ethics of data analytics class or governance of AI or privacy management. And in fact, 20 years ago when I started teaching about privacy itself, um, my colleague actually, uh, back then told me that you should propose your class as the name as integration of cybersecurity and privacy. It's politically wrong to call it as privacy class. I say, "Why?" It's such a tiny function. It's always like ethics and data and privacy is a tiny chapter for any cybersecurity textbook.

Nitesh Chawla 29:00

Wow.

Heng Xu 29:01

So if you try to propose a standalone data ethics and privacy class, it's against, uh, the main- mainstream. So you have to be mainstream, then call it as a cybersecurity. So after coming here, I have been overwhelmed by how students not just show interest and signed up for this class, but also they brought to me different aspects of meaning and purposes of doing this, right? So fall semester I taught the same class, but for our undergraduate students at Mendoza. There was a moment of my teaching, I was almost like in tears. Not only they would show their interest, they also came to me demonstrate or share, say, "Professor, I really appreciate how you unfold AI from ethical point of view. I also want to let you know that, you know, we also learned virtual ethics as the common core from our freshman year. This is the, what virtual ethics tell us to do when we face these technological dilemma as a decision maker, right? What we should do. And we also learned these ethical theories from the theology class which we took." And fresh- uh, sophomore year, Mendoza, uh, all the Mendoza undergraduate students also have to take a business ethics class. So they proactively share with me all these interdisciplinary ethics theories from all different perspective. And we actually had a communication that reached to the highest point of my teaching career, is that finally I think learning is like mutual It's not like my passive lecturing and students just check the boxes, you know, do all the assignments. Now, I also learn something new, another new theoretical perspective that my students brought from sociology point of view, and also inspire me to think about how I can bring, better bring that to today's AI, uh, management or AI governance. So I feel very inspired. I don't need to doubt myself again why I'm teaching this since no one is showing their interest. Can I do something, like, different maybe? You know, I have also fashion design background. Maybe I should say- Shall I design a class called data analytics for fashion prediction? That might be, you know, attract 100 students of sign up my class. And I guess I don't need to hide that part of, uh, my true identity in terms of I'm a advocate for consumer privacy rights, and I want every one of us at a, every one of us to safeguard, s- to safeguard, better protect our personal data. And I see that possibility here. As you mentioned, Mendoza is a place to grow the good in business, so I highly feel encouraged every day.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 32:02

Thank you, Hang. Thank you. A quick anecdote. I, I taught one of the sections of that required business ethics class, uh, this past semester, and it's, it's now called Foundations of Ethical Behavior, which I love a- as a label 'cause it's more expansive than just-- It used to be called Intro to Business Ethics. And what I found is, and this is I think a blessing of, of this current era, um, it used to be, uh, 10 years ago I taught that class, and it was like, "Hey, don't forget, you should be keeping in mind some of these ethical principles." It is impossible not to be thinking about the ethical dimensions of, of business and of technology in your day-to-day job now. And so I find that the students are legitimately hungry for it. They're not just- Yeah here, kinda have to eat your vegetables, so to speak.

Attendee 2 33:00

Yeah.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 33:01

So okay, let's turn to you, Josh. Um- What ways have you found to be a force for good at Palantir? And are there ways in which you intentionally try to form your employees and the workforce there in that regard?

Josh Zavilla ’11 33:19

Yeah. Thanks, Adam. And I think, uh, at the end of the day, the important thing to remember, and the Pope calls this out in the encyclical as well, is institutions that are using the AI, institutions that are implementing the AI are made up of people, right? And AI is not a divinity. AI is not the be-all, end-all of how we should implement things and how we should approach things. And so, at the end of the day, I think it is a tool in our toolkit as to how we can actually increase the humanity of the people that are working on things. I think there's lots of examples that I've seen, both on the government context where I work with a lot of customers where, you know, they'll have hundreds of people that are focused on data entry, and that's really not the best use of humanity's judgments, abilities, agency. And the advent of all this AI technology has really been able to free them up and say, "I don't have to do the data entry anymore. I can do data analysis. I can apply my own judgment." It brings it up a layer. So I think a lot of that is working with folks on that dimension of increasing the productivity and how do you say that agency that that human has, that subject matter expertise, that context can be multiplied. It becomes a multiplier for an institution, an organization that ultimately is responsible for the outcomes of how they're implementing that AI, right? It's not the, the AI that is the responsible party. It is ultimately the institutions wielding that AI that should be using that. And so I think a lot of what I see and what I'm dealing with is, one, how do you make people really the best versions of themselves, and how do you free them up to do 80% of the time that they're spending on a given activity or task, or 80% of the time that they're spending in their day is actually what they're uniquely differentiated and good at. Not just as a, you know, what can a person do, but what can they do that adds unique value? And I've seen people be able to, you know, 50X their workflows and outputs and, and everything because of that. And so I think that's one side of things. And I think the other side of things is how do you actually enable the institutions to do this? Because again, we-- there's a lot of talk around AI models being the thing that w- you know, we should be governing and controlling. But at the end of the day, as I said, it's the institutions that are wielding it. And if you drop AI into an institution that's calcified and hardened, highly bureaucratic, highly process-centric, and don't allow the experimentation Of the AI technology and tools in a way that, you know, a human is deciding on how to implement that, you've just created a more expensive version of a calcified process organization. Um, you really have to think about how do you, again, to your point at the beginning, implement those controls, those standards, provide the toolkits of saying, "This is the legal and ethical uses of how we as a government agency or as a private institution are using this AI." If that is not baked in from the start, you can't just sprinkle it in and hope that you catch it on the back end. Um, and so I really think there's a big push there of how do you really use AI as, again, a tool to bring the humanity out and own an ownership of those decisions.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 36:12

Thank you. Appreciate it, Josh. I, uh I, I wanna ask a, a question, uh, of you, Hung, but I'm gonna start with a quick anecdote, and it's, it's relatively quick. Uh, my birthday was, was, uh, a couple weeks ago. Actually, yeah, a couple weeks ago. My parents got me a Japanese chef's knife And, and my mom, like, couldn't help herself from saying, "This is really sharp, Adam." Like- "You, you should be careful. It's really sharp." To which I said something snarky like, "Oh, it's a- the knife is sharp? Okay. I'll make sure I don't cut myself," right? "Thanks for the disclaimer." And then fast-forward five days, it's my... I have four young children. It's my, it's my, uh, daughter Sienna's eighth birthday, and she's got, uh, five of her screaming eight-year-old buddies over, and I'm trying to quickly make them some dinner, and I'm using my chef's knife, and I- Now laugh. There are five stitches in this, in this finger un- underneath, uh, that bandage, uh, from, from trying to mince a, a garlic clove too quickly. And, and it's not that I didn't know it was sharp. And, and I think that's an interesting metaphor for a, a lot of w- a, a lot of... When it comes to using data, and, and, um, and being aware of, of its risks and our role in protecting it and preserving it, um, I think, uh, it feels like a lot of the disclaimers that are issued are very obvious. Mm. Yes, okay, privacy matters. Yes, I'm generating data about myself through all my behaviors. And just like I kind of ignored the, the very clear admonishment, I think we as consumers in, in our current lives can also have a way of just letting, letting the, the risk wash over us. Of course we know that that's a risk. I'm gonna just plow ahead. You are a very good teacher. You have, in fact, a great teaching tool with you.

Attendee 2 38:30

Yeah.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 38:30

And I wondered, you were, you were just showing us i- in the green room, if, if you could walk our, our audience through this as well. You have a way of, of talking about the difference between the statistical me-

Heng Xu 38:42

Yeah

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 38:42

and the real me. Could you unpack that for us?

Statistical Me vs Real Me

Heng Xu 38:45

Sure. Um, so this is, this pair of the terms I just coined out of, uh, teaching 92 students about ethics of data analytics in just, in this semester, right, in the spring. And they inspire me to think about, you know, how I can deliver this message, make them feel really creepy about how their data has been utilized today by the AI systems, and how, uh, maybe some of them actually walk out of the classroom say, "This is scary." So what I try to do, or what I try to advocate is the traditional notion of privacy or privacy governance or privacy regis- uh, legislations, regulations, or protection is not enough. We are facing a new era that we have to change the definition of privacy. Why I'm saying that, so the old notion of privacy is centering around the notion of personal data. Well, it makes sense, right? If it's we're collecting data from animals, there is no personal right attached to that from human point of view. So every single of our current legislation, regulations, organizational practices, we try to argue that data collection from human beings like you and me is the very first step, right? After we're collecting data, to be responsible, we have to talk about how we better s- store the data, process the data, analyze data, or, um, ca- should we actually delete the data to better protect our privacy rights? So every single discussion about privacy right now, the mainstream, is all about this notion of data and data flow, how we can responsibly manage that. But I try to scare my students saying that, well, if you only think about... that's still important, but if you only think about that way, you are actually assuming that, you know, these systems or the AIs, the tools are actually try to understand you based on the physical person of you. But let me tell you that today's technology are so powerful that they don't need to directly touch you or collect data from you. They can try to predict what you may look like or what you intend to click, what you intend to buy from billions of other people who may share similar patterns or taste, who may some- share some kind- common characteristics with you. So in other words, the systems are constantly constructing a statistical version of you. So I had this actually from my kids as Mother's Day gift in the fa- past months. What is this? They use my image, my kids use my image and go to the Lego, uh, platform, and Lego actually constructed me through these hundreds of studs here So then my kids use all these Lego pieces, constructed me. And what I tell my students, you can imagine these studs and thoughts, right, as the zero and ones of personal data that different entities can constantly collect. And then they are constructing a statistical version of me. Well, you may think there is some kind of similarity, right? But then it's actually not the actual part of me. And the danger of, for our society heading towards automatic decision-making would be these systems may make a decision and a prediction and judgment about what I'm going to buy, what I'm going to click, what I'm going to do based on this statistical construction of me rather than the physical real me sitting here. So that's the danger. We have to carefully think about how to govern this knowledge, predictions, and judgment simply constructed by the digital systems, which sometimes detract from the real human being and a physical human being. Do I have the rights in the future society and legislation in the privacy saying that I object this statistical version of me the AI system construct? We don't have such a kind of law yet. Hmm. We've probably started the conversation, but I don't know how we are going to regulate that.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 43:12

Thank you. Uh, let's, let's turn to... We don't have to applaud every time because we're just burning clap. We got- th- there's plenty to get through. We'll, we'll, we'll clap at

Privacy Enables Innovation

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 43:21

the end. Uh, okay, so, so, so then Josh, turning to you, sticking on, on the topic of privacy, you said something when, when we were, uh, preparing for this, that often the default setting is that, is that privacy, civil liberties, and innovation are, are at odds with one another or are kind of mutually exclusive concepts. Um, you have a different take on that. Can you walk us through that a little bit?

Josh Zavilla ’11 43:47

Yeah, sure thing. So I, I fully believe Technology should be used and really is ultimately one of the most effective means of implementing technology if done correctly with the right frameworks. And so, um, at Palantir, one of the things that we did actually from the start, it was coming out of nine eleven commission, it was how do we share data in a way to stop another nine eleven attack? How do we make sure that our service members, how do we make sure that our national security apparatus has access to the right data at the right time, and frankly, an intelligence gap doesn't happen again? But at the same time, you have to represent that in a way that controls privacy, civil liberties, not just from, I think a term that you used, compliance theater perspective, but from an actual perspective of implement it from an actual technical controls. But those controls must be flexible, that they meet the needs of the changing regulatory environments as well. As you know, I think, uh, the, uh, a new, uh, issue came up about, you know, nineteen seventy-four Privacy Act, right? That was the last time the United States government has really took a-- taken a look at what p-personal identifying information should look like in the United States government context and how that should be handled. Obviously, fifty years later, we're in a very different world of what technology is available. What that means, though, is the technologies that we're implementing must start first from the principle of being able to control down to the data point level And down to the role level, down to the attribute level, down to every component of who's accessing the data, how they're accessing the data, what the data can be exposed, and the auditing ability of that. And once you put that framework in place, it actually empowers a lot more of the outputs and the productivity, because you can be certain that, one, only the data that somebody has access to see is data that they are seeing. Two, you've created a framework where new technology such as an LLM or AI can absorb those same frameworks, can be treated like a user of a system. So you only expose the data that you want that component of AI or LLM to actually access, and then you can provide the frameworks where you can put the telemetry next to each other, where you're handing off from process point one to process point two and understand what's coming out from an input and output perspective. And that allows you to move faster. That allows you to implement things in a way that you can trust and control and monitor on the back end, because at the end of the day, you know, the, the government, you know, to use the context of what I work on a lot, is the responsible party for affecting these, right? Technology companies are not, and frankly, I wouldn't wanna work-- I wouldn't wanna live in a country where technology companies are deciding how things get implemented and how laws get implemented. It's the institutions that are deciding that. It's the government employees, it's the elected leaders that are implementing those things. But then also the technology must be flexible enough that when an administration turns over, when Congress turns over, when new laws are passed, when new leg-regulations are implemented, when new inferences are made about how policies or how technologies should be controlled, the technology has to be able to flex with that. Otherwise, your productivity gains go out the door, and you have to start from scratch. And so I think it's really that tension that must exist, and frankly, from a human perspective, only humans can answer that tension. And I think, bringing it back to Notre Dame, the civil discourse that Notre Dame really encourages around how do you have that conversation about the tension of the advancement of technology while at the same time managing the privacy and civil liberty and controls, and also managing the tension of what the government needs in protecting its citizens. All of those together, that, that requires conversation, and you actually can't have a good tool unless you have that conversation

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 47:17

Very well said. It's, uh, it harkens back to one of my favorite, uh, little morsels in the new encyclical. Pope Leo said, "We have to be willing to get our hands dirty in the construction site of history." And, uh, this is a massive project that is currently under construction, uh, to be sure. Gina, I'd love to turn to you, and then, and then Natesha, I'd like to come back to kind of what's going on on campus a little bit.

AI Workforce Upskilling

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 47:42

Um, but first, Gina, you know, one, one of the issues that is on everyone's mind, and when you're, when you work at a, at a university that is in charge of preparing the next workforce, the, the impact on the labor market of AI is kind of the elephant in the room. How-- what do you see at Microsoft? What are, what are you involved in in terms of reinventing the workforce, upskilling them? And, and if you can also kind of say, what advice would you give a, a, a Notre Dame alum o- of any stage of their career in how to kind of stay relevant and prepare for an uncertain future?

Gina Ayala Claxton ’01 48:21

Well, first, I'll say, uh, the angst, the worry, the concern is, is real. Um, and it's, it's warranted in some ways, right? So especially as it relates to kind of this transition generation, because I think that our kids, you know, hopefully my kids will, will be starting to learn differently, come into a workforce that is now more knowledgeable, more prepared for different types of work. But right now, it's kind of the bridge for, um, in making sure that groups don't get left behind. Uh, in my day job, I have the privilege of working with some of the largest employers in the world. Um, and if you take, like, uh, Walmart, for example, 2.1 million employees, and the CEO, former and current, they, uh, have tremendous concern about this topic because, uh, with inflation, with Tariffs and everything going on in these macro, uh, dynamics, they are trying to keep food prices down. That's their mission statement for families in, in, um, in communities. And their employees are what, you know, their, their most important asset is what they'll say. And they know the impact, the economic impact of employment that they affect in communities. So all of these things are causing tremendous angst, and they've said things like, um, "We won't reduce numbers of jobs. We'll just reduce the ty-- we'll change the type of work, change the job, not the numbers. Um, we'll create more human-to-human interactions by changing the way we work, but we're not actually-- we're gonna make sure everybody gets the other side." Well, those are pretty bold statements, and then it just becomes the how. How do you really do that? And that's where, um, partners like, like us in this industry come f- through and help. So there's, there's a couple of ways. One, of course, enabling and empowering their associates and, and employees with these digital assistants and things like that, creating that capacity, allowing them to use this technology in the way they work and unlock their creativity and all of those things are very, very important. But then in changing work, there will be a group that their work will no longer be the same, and therefore they won't have a role in the way that they had it before. And we have to acknowledge that and be extremely honest a-about it and then focus on how to create that bridge. The CEO of LinkedIn, which is also a Microsoft company, um, just released a book called "Open to Work," and it's really a book for that transition generation. It's meant to be kind of a playbook for how do you get across that bridge if you're in one of these types of places of work. Um, as Pope Leo said, humans are not algorithms. They're not numbers to be optimized, and yet that is-- w- as work ch-is changing, that is a fact. There's tremendous efficiency to be gained in certain areas with that. Um, and the book is really revolving around three themes. One is how do you engage with the technology early, um, yourself? So that you can get ahead of it before it comes. That might seem intuitive to some. Uh, it's not always, uh, or comfortable. And so there's, like, very clear tactical steps on how you might do that in your role. Um, the second is control what you can control. Control how you experiment, control how you start adopting and applying in your job because there's a lot you can't control. And frankly, the pace of change is something you can't control. Fear and paralysis, those are the worst thing you could do right now because we're trying to get ahead of this. There's a time dimension to this. So how do you actually take control of certain things? And there's, there's really steps there. And then the third is continue to foster those soft skills that Notre Dame prepares so well for, creativity, communication, uh, curiosity, these human, uh, spec- very human-centric skills. As they say, um, "Nobody, not even AI, can beat you at being you." Um, so there's a, there's a whole piece there with very practical steps. And we bring a lot of this into the conversation as well, again, for that kind of transition generation to help with the skilling and the reinvention. Um, and then also just to ensure that the CEO's mission of, you know, really, we want everybody to get through this, but, uh, the work will change, that we keep the human at the center of that. That is really the key, um, uh, as, as we navigate dignity and agency and all of those things in this really dynamic environment, so.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 53:30

Thank you, Gina.

Notre Dame Purposeful AI

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 53:31

Uh, so Nitesh, you started by highlighting some of the work that you and Notre Dame have done out there a-a-around the world. You also, uh, have a, have a mandate, uh, in leading this data, AI, and computing initiative on campus to continue to evolve the way that Notre Dame teaches and tackles these topics on our campus. Can you give us a little window into how that's going? That feels like a pretty big project.

Nitesh Chawla 53:59

Absolutely. So, um, about, uh, nine months ago when I was, uh, uh, asked to lead this role, which again, I'm super grateful to have that opportunity, it's an honor every single day, there were two things that were on the front and center of my mind. One was, what is that distinctive AI play that from a research and scholarship perspective that Notre Dame is called to, is known for, is becomes the beacon of, of, of sort of leadership, right? And as we've been thinking about purposeful AI, we, we've talked about rise AI a bit, and AI in science and engineering. And so that was one path we very rapidly started, and we, we really want to be the place for what we call purposeful AI. Second was curriculum Our students absolutely need us to act now, right? It was September, and one thing that we as universities like to do for everything when we are faced with a daunting question, we create a task force. Uh, so our first call to action was to the research and scholarship. We created different working groups. We activated the campus. Great. We created a task force, and, and then I went to my task force chairs. I went to all the deans. I said, "Recommend your faculty to me," because I really wanted it to be a representative movement, and I-- then I asked the task force chairs after they signed up with full enthusiasm. I said, "This is great. We have to get this done in three months." That is unheard of in the academic circles. Our task force has run for a year. Then we have a discussion, dialogue, and recommendations. We got-- I'm so grateful to the chairs of the task force, Pat Flynn and Mike Hildreth. Um, and they had representation from all over campus. Uh, you were in the task force as well, Hung, so thank you for your time and gift. So we got that task force together, and the task force had some real recommendations. Um, we have now converted those recommendations, and I'll tell you about what those recommendations are and how we are approaching it, into a proposal, uh, to Lilly Endowment as well, a twelve million dollar ask to revamp our curriculum. So in less than nine months, we have made all these moves and actions that our proposal is pending. We've been experimenting with different curricular pathways, et cetera. So now what I believe, what, what are we thinking of doing and, and what we should do, so th-there's two things that, you know, both of you said in your remarks that, you know, uh, when you were, uh, quoting Popeo, you said the human is not an algorithm, and likewise, an algorithm is not a human.

Attendee 1 56:36

Mm-hmm.

Nitesh Chawla 56:36

Right? Let's recognize those two facts. Then you said it's a construction site. So now where we are in the world, these algorithms and humans are constructing a future together It's not just the humans, it's not just the algorithms together, but each have their own virtues and, and, and qualities that they're bringing in. And as you said, you know, technology can respond to the privacy challenges. There's a technological solve to it if there's a regulation ask for it, if there's a, if there's a civil discourse about

Curriculum Access and Minors

Nitesh Chawla 57:07

it. So the way we are approaching it is there's two ways. One is how do we make sure every student at Notre Dame has an access to AI? So we are introducing courses within which will satisfy a co-curriculum requirement, right? Uh, whether it's the, you know, if you have students right now on campus, the WKST, WKQR, a co-curriculum requirement where every student must have an access to a introductory course in AI. That's done. And why it's the-- this is the most beautiful construction site in the world. They're taking that AI course while they're also doing moral seminars, while they're also taking the introduction to theology class or their philosophy class. So they are thinking about two things simultaneously. And then we said, let's create off-ramp, let's create minors and supplementary majors where if Mendoza, ITAO is offering two minors in business AI, make it available to all students on campus. Arts and Letters has a minor in data science, make it available to all s- it already has been, let's scale it. Uh, computer science and engineering has, ACMS has. So we have all of these o- how do we now give students an option to go beyond that one course? How do we now also think about the, the future would be, in my opinion, folks who are Sort of, you know, we have talked about T-shaped scholars, but I think it's the letter, the, the pi symbol scholars where they should be domain experts. Like what Gina brings as her gift, as she was talking about the gifts we bring to work, you understand the retail sector extremely, extremely well. And then when she goes in as a problem solver, she knows that, but she also understands what responsible AI should look like. And she-- But that domain expertise is important. So imagine a world where our students, through their four years of education at Notre Dame, have a, an opportunity to go through, have a supplementary major possibility while they're learning about AI and computing. So all of those possibilities will emerge. Uh, and literally a year ago, we didn't have an AI minor in, in Mendoza. In nine months, students are signed up, 60 students, uh, plus in each of those minors. We have minors in data sciences. But then the other question that becomes, and I was asking my son, who's a freshman in Mendoza, finance freshman. I'm like, "So what do you think about AI?" And he said, "You know what's cool is I can create code." What does it mean you can create code? You don't like coding. He's a computer scientist son. Uh, but there is only saving grace is he b- he made me a Notre Dame parent, so he can do anything he wants now. Uh, uh, but, uh, you know, he said, "Well," uh, but I said, "Well, how do you mean create code?" He said, "I use these tools. I don't write." He said, "You're confusing. The tools write code for me. I create it." Like, what does that mean? He said, "I think about the world and the system, what I need it to do. I'm imagining the way it could be used. And then I ask these tools to be my accompaniment, be my assistant, be my co-designer." And that I thought was a revolutionary moment. He actually wrote a paper, uh, when he left h- because he was educated at an amazing high school that, that Adam was at. He wrote a paper which said how AI can be a co-mentor, uh, published in American Society of Engineering Education, where, how they use AI to create a product that he wanted to build out. And, and that to me is, and that's exactly what, you know, Gina and Josh, you were talking about what you are seeing. The world would belong in folks who can think in abstract systems.

Josh Zavilla ’11 1:00:54

Yeah.

Nitesh Chawla 1:00:55

What is the big system level thinking? Can, can think about boundary conditions, can think about layers of empowerment, can think about is the data good, is the data privacy, and then have the space of thinking, have the space of a dialogue as a human and an algorithm at that construction site, and communicate that to these AI tools. Because these tools are absolutely here, right? They're not going away, right? So it's on us what kind of constructions we want to build together and how we use them to optimize what you were talking about in your Walmart example. The question is becoming is how these agents are going to be empowering individuals to do more. And perhaps the outcome could be it's, uh, it's a, um, uh, we achieve a lot more efficiency as well, but als-also a lot more gains and more benefits to the human because now we are not being myopic in our world that this is what I'm designed to do. I can take two steps back and think globally because some of those tasks I can outsource to an AI agent. And folks, oft-- I'm a computer scientist, right? I think it's a great time to be a computer scientist because what's gonna happen is there'll be lot... My son's name is Ahan. There's gonna be lot of Ahans creating code. Someone will have to make sure the system and the-- is engineered well. Mm-hmm. It's all working together. A lot more code snippets will exist in every organization because there's a lot more Ahans who are going to be empowered, and that's where the software engineering principles, the system design principles. So it's, it will require us as universities to change and adapt very quickly, very fast. But my goodness, if, if, if we, you know, if there has to ever be a construction site for this curriculum, it is here. And as I said earlier, in nine months, we have a task force done. We have, we have imaginations of minors, majors, curricular course force, force work done, a proposal written for funding to support our faculty. Uh, just yesterday morning, uh, Nick Berente, who's a senior associate dean, and Joker, who's the under, sent me an email saying their biggest concern is how do we make sure all students have access to the latest tools? Say if, if cloud is best or OpenAI is best or ChatGPT, not everyone can afford access. Think about it. Some can pay $200 a month. Some can't pay $20 a month. That creates... So they came to me with that question, can the initiator figure out a pilot where we give everyone same kind of... And I said, "Sure, let's get together next week." And when, you know, we have to solve problems, you're gonna meet at Rue, it's not DACA, it's to solve a problem, right? Um, so we said we're gonna meet toget- together next week. This was just yesterday that there was this email exchange. So what gives me a lot of joy is At Notre Dame, the students care about this, and the faculty care about it as much or even more. Yes, there are things about pedagogy, there are things about how AI can be used, there are things about AI and cheating and everything else. We need to figure those things out. I won't deny it. There are real challenges that we have to figure out for the classroom, and we will. But we also have to make sure that we are imagining a curricular space that makes us uncomfortable as well as professors, 'cause it's going beyond... You know, we own our classroom. It's our kingdom, right? And we are teaching, right? When she is the, uh-- She made ethics in f- you know, she has a fashion background, as she said. She made ethics in fashion in data analytics, right? Uh, she made it a fashionable term. Uh, so I think it's the, uh, it's how we bring all of those things together in the classroom and see how these humans and algorithms will operate. How can we teach them to be responsible? How can we teach them to be creative? And how can we teach them to have a broader mindset? I am, like, s- looking forward to the next year when students who are taking AI class are also taking moral seminar class.

Josh Zavilla ’11 1:05:12

Mm-hmm.

Nitesh Chawla 1:05:13

Having a discernment of life and having a discernment on AI all together or taking, uh, Theology 1 or God and Good Life in philosophy. I mean, it's, that's, that's the greatest time to be at Notre Dame. Gosh, I wouldn't do it anywhere else. Thank you. And it's the greatest time to be a computer scientist. There you go. I'm in so much joy. Okay. I'm telling you, like, don't worry

Closing Story

Nitesh Chawla 1:05:33

about computer science.

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 1:05:33

I will end with a very quick anecdote that is a very Notre Dame, uh, quick story, and then I'd, I'd ask you to, to join me in thanking our panelists, and we will all stick around and, and meet you in the lobby. There's obviously other questions to be answered. Uh, I've got four young kids. My oldest is 13. He was 12 last winter, and last winter, this past winter just ended like yesterday here in South Bend, right? But, but the last winter there wasn't much snow, especially before Christmas. Uh, it was, it was early in January, and we went to bed, uh, and there was no snow on the ground. We woke up, and there was this beautiful dusting of snow, uh, just, just objectively awe-inspiring, uh, scene. The sun's coming up, it's glinting off the snow crystals. And my oldest, whose name is Soren, very turbo Notre Dame name, um- He had just gained the ability, uh, by virtue of his size, to ride shotgun, and so now he can look out the windshield, which is like a whole new world. And so it's pretty early in the morning, we're all just doing what we can to get to school on time. And as we're driving down the driveway, he just gasps and says, "This is so beautiful. It looks like AI made it." And

Nitesh Chawla 1:06:50

It's like,

Adam Kronk, ’02, ’09 MNA 1:06:51

yeah. Yeah. And I, I just had, I had not had enough coffee to explain to him why that was the most depressing thing I've ever heard. But, but if you think about it, and to Jennifer's point, the, the, we are, we are little by little aware of the way that this technology can affect our own interpretation of the meaning of our lives and, and why we're here and what a win looks like. And at a place like Notre Dame, y- uh, we have, you know, right over here, uh, to the right, we've got one of the most beautiful church buildings I've ever been in, and we have on offer the grotto, whatever it might be, these things that are meant not to be, uh, monetized, not to be necessarily increased by technology, whatever it is, but just to remind us of our relationship with the divine and our creator and what our ultimate purpose is. And it's so beautiful to get to have these conversations with that dimension on the conversation, 'cause otherwise we're not gonna get it right. So please join me in thanking Nitesh, Gina, Hong