AI, Adversaries & Adaptation with Jennifer Ewbank

In this episode, Francis Gorman sits down with Jennifer Ewbank, former CIA Deputy Director for Digital Innovation, to explore what it means to lead with purpose in a world shaped by geopolitical risk, digital disruption, and information warfare.

Jennifer shares stories from her extraordinary career in intelligence — from espionage during the Cold War to launching the CIA’s first AI office — and offers deeply human reflections on risk-taking, resilience, and transition. From the digital battlefield to the Camino de Santiago, this conversation ranges from high-stakes decision-making to how we build trust in an age of deepfakes and AI manipulation.

Takeaways

• Purpose Under Pressure: A clear sense of mission is what sustains leadership in complex, high-risk roles.
• You’ll Never Have All the Information: Good decisions often require boldness, not certainty — a lesson from field operations that applies to enterprise leadership.
• The Real Threats Are Already Inside: Critical infrastructure is increasingly compromised by cyber actors who may lie dormant for years before striking.
• Transition Is a Process: Jennifer’s solo Camino de Santiago pilgrimage was both a mental and physical journey into a post-CIA identity.
• Trust Is the New Battlefield: Generative AI, deepfakes, and algorithmic manipulation are eroding public trust at scale — and rebuilding it starts with education and digital literacy.
• Operational Mindset for Innovation: Solving complex problems quickly with limited resources isn’t just for the CIA — it’s the new model for digital transformation.

Soundbytes

• “Sometimes the greatest risk is not taking the risk.”
• “You never have all the information — expecting it is a recipe for paralysis.”
• “Absent a deep connection to purpose, you lose the urgency to solve real problems.”
• “The battlefield isn’t just physical anymore — it’s informational, algorithmic, and real-time.”
• “Trust is under attack. And the worst part is, most people don’t realize it.”
• “You think the algorithm is adapting to you. But really, you’re adapting to it.”

Transcript

Francis Gorman (00:06.112)
Hi everyone. Welcome to the Entropy podcast. I'm your host, Francis Gorman. If you're enjoying our content, please take a moment to like and follow the show wherever it is you get your podcasts from. Today I'm joined by Jennifer Eubank, a leader who's helped shape the digital future of national security. She served as the CIA's deputy director for digital innovation, where she led the transformation of one of the world's most secure and complex digital ecosystems. She has spearheaded efforts in artificial intelligence, cybersecurity,

open source intelligence and data security. She founded the CIA's first office of AI, putting the US on a stronger footing in that digital domain. Now Jennifer advises boards, founders and executive teams navigating the intersection of national security, emerging technology and enterprise risk. With decades of global operational experience, she helps organizations lead through disruption, build resilience and act boldly in an age where AI and geopolitical risk are reshaping everything. She's also sought after speaker and taught leader

known for connecting real world leadership with the urgent challenges of today's digital landscape. And it's lovely to have you with me here today, Jennifer.

Jennifer Ewbank (01:11.574)
It is terrific to be here, Frances. Thank you so much for the invitation. wow, that was quite the introduction. Thank you.

Francis Gorman (01:18.798)
As I said previously, I like to build a bit of momentum before we get going, know, puts a bit of onus on the speaker to live up to the spiel of the...

Jennifer Ewbank (01:28.014)
There you go. I was going to say keep your expectations low and everything will be great, but now we'll have to see. But it's great to see you. Really nice to chat with you, Frances.

Francis Gorman (01:39.34)
Jennifer, it's lovely to have you here. You've lived quite a bit in terms of your career. you tell me what drew you into the intelligence field and how did that evolve over time?

Jennifer Ewbank (01:55.554)
goodness. So I wish that there were some really, I don't know, insightful and inspirational story there. A little bit of it was serendipity. And so I think as you're aware, I believe, I was in the State Department as a Foreign Service Officer, so a diplomat working overseas, the waning days of the Cold War and...

You know, I liked it. I enjoyed my time abroad. I enjoyed my colleagues enjoyed the work I had joined the Foreign Service to you know, do my part to fight communism. I was one of those people and with with the Cold War over and things were changing and there was a bit of a re-evaluation of what diplomacy would be what we'd focus on for me, it was just a good time to try something else and and this is where the serendipity comes in.

I had planned to go back home to California and pursue a career in the Bay Area where I grew up. And my sister had given my resume to a friend without telling me. And it was a friend who had been a senior officer at the CIA. And so I got a phone call one day from a CIA recruiter and recounted this story several times to people. So I feel bad saying it again, but it was kind of comical. was.

phone call where he says, I'm calling from the Central Intelligence Agency. And I really do think I said something as eloquent as, yeah, right. And he said, no, really, I said, yeah, right. And really it was a few weeks later, I was knocking on the door of a hotel room somewhere in San Francisco to remain unnamed to meet a random recruiter from the CIA. And everything sort of went from there. And without,

knowing it, I fell into something that was just perfect for me. really, what resonated with me, you there is a sense of adventure. It's a place where one can really satisfy intellectual curiosity. You know, I'm fascinated by cultures and languages and different perspectives and different issues and every couple of years, everything was new. New country, new language, new subjects.

Jennifer Ewbank (04:15.138)
to study new people to meet, you name it, everything was new. And so it was always fresh, always challenging, rarely easy, which is kind of what I liked. And it gave me a way to serve my country. I grew up in a family where service was highly valued and all the men in my family at that point had served in the military. And without even knowing it, I was sort of gently nudged in that direction.

One thing I'll say, you mentioned the journey, one observation I'll make, you know, I've had a lot of time to reflect on what was an amazing career. I retired from government service about a year ago and I've gone off and I'm doing other things these days. And I reflect about that trajectory in the CIA as an operations officer. didn't mention that that's what I did. So around the world, collecting secrets on plans and intentions of our adversaries and then leading teams and doing that.

The early days, it really seemed like a pretty simple thing. I just wanted to answer the questions, find the piece of information, get the answer, and then all would be right with the world, I guess. And over time, I really came to see, as any rational person would, that it was all about navigating risk, complexity, ambiguity, and just trying to give bits and pieces of decision advantage.

to the president and to policymakers and hoping that together that all those pieces would create a puzzle that could really allow us to make the best choices for our country and for our allies around the world. And I came to see the job was much more complex and more demanding than I saw at the beginning, of course. The more I oversaw, the more I realized the complexity of what we were trying to do. But it was an amazing

trajectory, amazing career. I wouldn't trade it for anything. I wish I could start it all over again. Life doesn't work that way, unfortunately. But if it did, man, I would do it again in the heartbeat.

Francis Gorman (06:24.468)
Jennifer, suppose when you talk about it like that, it's very easy to compare it to large enterprise. You're navigating complexity. You're trying to understand risk. You're trying to articulate the so what to your leadership teams. Did you learn some pivotal leadership lessons across that career? What has stood to you now that you're transitioning to do other things in terms of that foundation?

Jennifer Ewbank (06:45.774)
Mm.

Francis Gorman (06:54.348)
that ability to articulate and I suppose not to be daunted by the unknown.

Jennifer Ewbank (07:00.014)
Yeah, well, that's a good way to put it, Frances. I think so many people are daunted by the unknown. They're anxious about it. And if the CIA taught me anything, and certainly my many years in leadership positions, including four times as chief of station, sort of our senior person in a country and one case for a region.

Jennifer Ewbank (07:29.046)
you never have all the information. You never have it. And expecting it is just a recipe for paralysis. And so I think that was one of the key lessons that I think really does apply in business for me these days. Of course you want to gather the best information. Of course you want to analyze it. Of course you want to apply critical thinking. But if you're the clear answer for every problem, particularly if we're talking about the digital tech world,

you're never going to get it. And so the key takeaway, I think, from years and years in the operational role in the CIA is that sometimes the greatest risk is not taking the risk. Because there is risk embedded in action. And I think that sometime is lost in big commercial enterprises, certainly in other parts of government. And so I think that risk

appreciation or ability to manage risk was one of the key things. Adaptability and resilience are also really critical. It's not a job that everyone wants to do or everyone should do. It's incredibly demanding, sometimes physically, always mentally. And it's an extreme career by any measure. And as an extreme career, it just demands a lot from you.

And so.

One could never do that career well and stay at it for very long if you weren't driven by a deep sense of purpose, of mission. And I used to say the big why. And you had to have that, that had to burn inside of you to drive you to do an impossible job for 30 years or so. And so that sense of purpose is something that I've really taken.

Jennifer Ewbank (09:30.03)
to every position that I had, and certainly making that leap from the operational world to the digital technology world, which was quite unusual in government and certainly in the CIA. And that was one of the things that I brought with me to that role was framing all the immense challenges we had on our plate in terms of the broader mission and the purpose of us doing it. It wasn't about just building the next gadget. It was really about solving big complex problems.

and helping our officers in the field have the best advantage they could when they're out there on the streets doing something that many rational people would think is impossible. And so that sense of purpose and connection to the mission was really critical. And maybe the last thing I would mention that really came through, and there are probably a hundred other lessons, maybe I need to write a book about it or something, but another one in...

People pay lip service to this pretty frequently, but man, I saw it in action, vividly, powerfully, not every day, but many times a week. And that is the power of diverse skills and perspectives to solve really complex problems. And so in the field, so let's talk about the espionage mission overseas. So it was not uncommon that we would have, let's say the opportunity of a lifetime with some...

elusive intelligence target that was available to us in the environment where we were working. And if anyone's read the books or read their history or maybe saw the movie, each time was kind of an Apollo 13 moment and where we had something impossible to accomplish on a compressed timeline with limited resources, limited people, limited technology, limited money, whatever it was, but limited resources, compressed timeline.

and impossible mission and all you can do in those situations is just lay it all out literally and figuratively on the table, get the team together and then break it down step by step, sort of systems engineering approach and then start sequencing how you can solve the little pieces to solve the big puzzle. And how can you do that in the timeline with resources you have. And so that operational mindset really did inform the way I thought about leading digital tech.

Jennifer Ewbank (11:52.27)
Because the answer to every technical problem or every technical requirement, let's say, it couldn't be, need 100 people and $100 million. That's just not the answer every time. If it were, well, the American public would be broke, but it's not the answer. It's about prioritization, it's about using your resources wisely, and it's about moving quickly. And so that coming out of the operational world was very much something that I carried through in every leadership position and in particular.

in my last one for four and a half years leading digital tech at the CIA.

Francis Gorman (12:25.88)
And I think that that was something I was going to ask you. You navigated from that traditional intelligence operations to digital transformation. I think you've, you've encapsulated it quite beautifully there in terms of, you know, your ability to adapt to the unknown is kind of forged with the skills you pick up, even in a time you may think are not relevant. And I see that, I see that a lot. People who've come from different backgrounds.

always have a unique perspective. And when you bring those people in and then they enrich that skill set with something else, they're always highly valuable in the room because they think slightly differently to people who've had a linear path. And I think that's really valuable.

Jennifer Ewbank (13:12.638)
Well, I would like to think so. And I saw that there was value in that approach. And I won't lie, when I was offered the role, so it's one of the five deputies who lead the CIA, so you have operations and analysis and support, science and technology, so largely technology with a physical manifestation, and then digital tech. When I was offered the role, of course I said,

Yes, I was super honored when the director asked me. But there was a moment right after when I thought, hmm, well, this will be interesting. Let's see whether, in fact, I have some sort of digital deficit for the job. And in fact, it didn't take me all that long to see that there was a reason for her madness in naming me. And I will say that, and honestly, I don't mean it to sound that way,

Jennifer Ewbank (14:12.044)
The arc of my career in the operational world really did track the trajectory of technology development and the application of that technology in demanding environments, solving complex problems. And then the demand signal to drive innovation in that space. And then as I became increasingly senior in the role, I had larger and larger teams and I oversaw teams doing every aspect of digital tech in the field. And so...

and kind of weaving them together in integrated ways that apparently were new. And so it didn't take me long to see that there was a piece of the puzzle that I could really fill that was needed. And we had amazing technologists, and I would say the best in government. I have very little way to compare them otherwise, but just top notch, technical skill, devoted people doing amazing things.

But I've always found that absent that connection to kind of the big why, your deep purpose, absent that, absent the urgency of solving a problem for a real person, a real activity at the other end of the spear, we say the pointy end of the spear was out there in the field. Without that connection, without the deep purpose, without understanding the complexity of that operational environment that people are moving in and trying to operate in, something's missing.

And maybe it's drive, maybe it's focus, maybe it's the ability to prioritize, maybe it's the ability to communicate. But all of those things came really directly out of that operational world. And they were at least what I tried to apply to our mission, was thousands of people all around the world doing something that was pretty challenging.

Francis Gorman (16:04.3)
very unique perspective, Jennifer, and thank you for sharing it. I think people get a lot of value when they hear this from someone who's lived it. They can relate it to their own lives and say, actually, maybe I should take that risk. Maybe I should diversify my skill set and do something different. So thank you for sharing that piece. I do want to ask when you stepped away from the high stakes career that you've just walked us through, you embarked on the Camino de Santiago.

Did that teach you anything in terms of purpose or changing yourself? Just stepping away, taking some time, walking the walk. I know my parents did it not so long ago and they took away lots of sore feet and the pain in their back. I'm not sure how spiritual it was for them. I'm always interested to hear the expectation of what that journey will bring and the reality of it. I'd like see how you found the Camino.

Jennifer Ewbank (17:03.982)
I appreciate the question.

Jennifer Ewbank (17:11.086)
You know, each person pursues that for a very individual reason. And for me, it was something I'd wanted to do for over 40 years. I was a student in Southern France in the early 80s and spent a couple months in a town in the Pyrenees called Peau. And it was not far from a couple of the trail heads on the French side going up over the Pyrenees.

done hiking outings in the Pyrenees and I had great photos of myself at the kind of at a pass in the Pyrenees and I had heard about the Camino de Santiago and I always thought I wanted to go and back then you'd see the occasional symbol, oh right there, a scallop shell. But nobody was walking it really. I don't remember seeing more than one or two people and it was just not very popular but it was always in the back of my mind and I just never had the time.

you know, devoted time. It's typical, typical itineraries is five weeks. It's a little bit longer. You add the travel time to and from, maybe stay a day at beginning of the end. And so really six weeks. And I just never had six weeks off to do anything. And so when I was preparing to retire from the CIA and I know I was going to retire for a few years, I, I jealously guarded that time. And, and I did it for a variety of reasons. One, to fulfill this

I know, bucket list thing that I on my mind for so many years. But more importantly, I had seen so many people leave these extreme careers, case officers in particular at the CIA operations officers. And I'm sure there are others, but this is what I had most direct experience with.

I've seen people leave those and actually officers from the special ops community in the military leaving something that's really all consuming. It consumes everything in your life. It is how you define yourself. It is what you do. It's what you think. It's how you sleep. It's everything about you is defined by this truly extreme unusual role. And so I've seen so I saw so many people leave and not leave very well to be honest.

Jennifer Ewbank (19:31.916)
So leave government on a Friday, started a company on a Monday. And it was like there was a hole somewhere in their heart. And what I've said to people, I think I've wrote in an article, was as if their life was entombed in amber at the moment that they walked away from that thing that defined them for so long. And I didn't want that. I wanted something else. And so in the speech that I gave, we traditionally give a speech,

as we're retiring and in it I mentioned that I would be leaving in a few days for the Camino and that I viewed it as a physical and mental transition from one life to the next. And that's what it was. So it was just me alone right as the season opened the first week that the passes opened across the Pyrenees. And so, you know, pretty empty, cold and did it alone. And it was just an opportunity to

Frankly...

absorb the import of my time at the agency, to appreciate it, to leave with gratitude and love for all of the things that I had had the opportunity to do, really the honor to do, and to think about what next. And my purpose had been so clear for all those years, right? You've got family, you've got friends, okay, let's put that aside, but professional purpose was always very clear and that was, you know, protect my country.

And so it was an opportunity to spend time not thinking about it too intensively, but just to have stillness and extreme physical exertion kind of helps too. And to allow a purpose to emerge more organically and over time. And so there were all sorts of moments that were...

Jennifer Ewbank (21:32.494)
metaphors for what I needed to be thinking about or maybe my mind just interpreted the moment as a metaphor for something that it knew I needed to do. so it's a really long way of saying that over the course of those six weeks, it was an opportunity to kind of separate from that former government life and do so with gratitude and no regrets. To think about purpose and it was clear to me

and had been in any case, but for several years, my final years in the agency, I had been in a number of roles that were uniquely connected to US industry. And I spent a lot of time working on talking about advocating for economic security as a key aspect of national security. And so I thought, okay, well, here's my opportunity to put my money where my mouth is and actually get out there and see what it's like to help.

strengthen economic security in the country, which is a huge driver of our society and our democracy. okay, find a new purpose that for me is compelling. I think it's important. And frankly, we're at this moment in history where business and government need to be working together more closely than ever if we're really gonna solve the big problems in digital tech.

lecturing to people who know this, but in digital tech, that innovation is really coming out of industry. It's not coming out of government. so participating in that, helping to lead that on the business end has been a fantastic opportunity for me. And I do view it as very much tied, a continuation of that longer effort to protect my country. I guess that sounds a little bit corny to people these days.

But that's how I grew up. We believed that the United States can and should be a force for good and our allies are important and serving is important. And so in my own little way, it's an opportunity to continue serving and hopefully help build those partnerships between industry and government.

Francis Gorman (23:48.302)
Thanks very much, Jennifer. Off the back of that, let's talk about what that looks like now in terms of the modern digital battlefield. From an intelligence perspective and from what you're seeing in today's world and the geopolitical landscape we all find ourselves in and the unknowns, what does the modern digital battlefield look like from your perspective?

Jennifer Ewbank (24:18.208)
Yeah, it's a great question, Frances. And maybe I'll just kind of pick a few things out there because it is a pretty complex issue. think one thing we can do is pause and just recognize that we're talking about actual battlefields. So Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. we think about, look at Ukraine as the first, let's say, full spectrum digital

war in addition to physical war, the first time that we've seen this. So, seen the full gamut of cyber capabilities applied. Originally, know, disruption and collection, obviously. So, with the satellite communications, so with energy, certainly collection of both sides has been really important, collection on the adversary. But a couple other really interesting things, it has been, it's really been...

Jennifer Ewbank (25:20.64)
Innovation is really being forged in the fires of this conflict. And I'm in touch from time to time with innovation leaders in Ukraine who are doing amazing work under incredible pressure. in a way, it's, right, we used to joke that it's, you know, diamonds forged under pressure and not stones smoothed over time. And they're just doing some incredible things because they have to. And so...

the advances in all the things that you read about in the press, know, drones, obviously a big piece of it. But on the back end too, an AI and using data, it's pretty extraordinary. And then a couple other things that I think are worth noting in this kind of battlefield that are new, right? It's the first international conflict that I can think of where almost anywhere in the world, you could watch developments in near real time by tracking open source reporting.

Everyone's an open source intelligence reporter these days. Somebody's got a camera, someone's got a podcast, someone's got a video message, whatever it might be. It's extraordinary. And every morning, if I'm inclined, I can pull up a dynamic battlefield reenactment and see down to very precise locations where forces on each side are located and what the biggest challenges were the day before. And that was never, that has never been.

the case. And so this is changing, I think, the nature of battle. And in the last piece, would, I'm going to do two things. One is the whole world of ubiquitous sensing that has kind of developed over this past decade. And that goes with what my comments, very brief comments about AI and the ability to use data. I mean, just imagine how powerful that is when

everything that somebody is doing, saying, or the person they're meeting, or the thing they're writing, or... It's all registered by a sensor somewhere. Almost always. And so the ability to tap into that is really, really powerful. And so that is now a new aspect of the digital battlefield that just, you know, even five years ago would not have been so prominent.

Jennifer Ewbank (27:45.774)
And then maybe the last thing, this is sort of, it's related but not central is just the ambiguity these days between criminal and state actors. So we certainly see that in Russia, you see that in China, you see that in few other places where it's very difficult to distinguish who are the state actors and who are the criminal actors these days. And the criminal actors have the sophistication of state actors.

State actors are hiring criminal actors as basically contract cyber personnel. The whole world of ransomware and disruption is a factor that is changing the nature of the digital battlefield in really unique ways where threat actors who don't have the technical sophistication, the know-how, the resources, nevertheless are not restrained in their.

capability to launch pretty sophisticated ransomware disruption attacks on targets simply by buying it on a dark web platform. mean, platforms that I'm told I haven't signed up for any of these services personally, but I'm told that some of these platforms, they're up there with customer service connections and user reviews and you name it, money back guarantees. But ransomware is a service in that.

permeable membrane these days between state actors and criminals in certain countries. I think that has been a really game changing development as well. And it just adds to the complexity. If you're defending yourself, just think about the complexity of that battlefield these days. It's not just one actor with one set of capabilities. Now you have these tentacles that go off in all sorts of different directions that you have to somehow anticipate and defend against. And that is tremendously

tremendously challenging.

Francis Gorman (29:42.536)
Jennifer, on that, I suppose if I look back at the evolution of malware and ransomware and wiper technologies, et cetera, and the current geopolitical landscape with the conflict in Iran and Gaza, et cetera, and I think of how the intelligence agencies went after the uranium program at Stokesnet and that type of technology. Do you see alleged... Sorry.

Jennifer Ewbank (30:06.048)
Allegedly.

Francis Gorman (30:10.834)
Allegedly may or may not have we won't we won't get into it, but it will reference the Kim Zetter book on Countdown to Zero Day for that reference material. Do you see and I was I was talking to John Kindervig, I think it is about two years ago in terms of the kind Zero Trust, Al Forrester.

and talking about what will come out of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict at the time in terms of more aggressive wiper technology, et cetera. And we saw a little bit of that used in the modern battlefield in that space. And if you look at what happened in Europe at Roland power cuts a while back, I know we're pointing to different areas of weakness that brought those on. But do you ever wonder what systematically could happen if

we combine artificial intelligence with bad intent. I know a lot of people have hypotheses on this and start going after, know, core infrastructure, water, electricity, et cetera. Is that a real threat or is it still a pseudo analogy for something else?

Jennifer Ewbank (31:19.5)
It's a tremendous threat and it's the one key thing that I left out of that kind of snapshot in the digital battlefield and the threats to critical infrastructure, one of the most important things that the US is facing, and there are plenty of partners around the world who are facing similar things, but if I talk about the US specifically.

Everyone who reads the news has heard about some of the more famous actors out there, Volt Typhoon. So those are Chinese actors who are embedded deeply into critical infrastructure across the US. so it's interesting to go back and think, even 10 years ago when there were initially, let's say, indicators that such activity could be ongoing. And most people could not quite understand the why.

immediately. They were so used to cyber intrusions being an effort to collect personal information, to collect intellectual property, to collect classified information if it's government secrets, etc. They were so used to that that they didn't actually see the much more nefarious thing that was unfolding before our very eyes. Well, I won't say before our very eyes because it's pretty hard to find, but much more nefarious and that is implanting

deep-seated capabilities and critical infrastructure for one purpose only that I can think of that any analyst can think of, and that is to cause massive disruption at a time of that threat actors choosing. And we can debate what that time is, but clearly, let's hope there's military conflict with that country. But if that were to come to pass, then clearly this is an amazing capability for that country. And so that is something that is a huge problem.

And even though we know that power sector, water, transportation, you name it, many, many aspects of critical infrastructure have been penetrated by actors like Volt Typhoon and Volt Typhoon. Even though we know they're there, even though we know there have been intrusions, I cannot say with any confidence that all have been evicted. And even if they are,

Jennifer Ewbank (33:34.626)
Frankly, cyber actors are so sophisticated and capable these days. And some of these systems are so antiquated that it is just a matter of time before someone can get back in. So that's a long way of saying that critical infrastructure, huge problem. And so generative AI has really just supercharged the speed, the scale, and the reach of cyber operations in a way that

I think it does represent a huge challenge to defenders these days. And there's never a balance, right? On the offense, and I'll say this because I come from both worlds, and the offense is always, always going to be more willing to take risk and move faster. And so, there's always gonna be, there's this disconnect there in speed between the newest capabilities and newest threats that are out there by fill in the blank actor.

and the ability to defend against them. And that's a tremendous challenge for us. So generative AI, like I guess like all new exciting technologies is a double-edged sword. It can be used for amazing things. I read with awe every day about advances in medicine and in space exploration and you name it. All these things where AI is making tremendous contributions to our society and to our friends and allies around the world.

but I also see the sophistication of the attacks that are coming in the cyber realm, definitely. And then last one I'll mention, I don't think it gets enough discussions today. So the whole world of deep fakes and disinformation has been tremendously.

lifted in its capabilities by generative AI. And there's plenty of articles about, look at this fantastic or this very impressive deep fake video. Okay, well, that's kind of a party trick. But what's interesting, and I think the bigger issue here is that trust itself is under attack here. And so when we are at a point today,

Jennifer Ewbank (35:52.066)
If you've seen some of the most recent commercial video creation models that have come out, like we are at a point today where you cannot believe your eyes and ears. You just can't. And so what does that do for trust? And I really see that trust is fraying here. It's fraying trust between people in government. Doesn't matter which administration, but people in government, trust between people in their communities, trust.

across trust with systems that we interact with, trust is really under attack and we have got to do something to change that. And so that's, think one of the, I know one of the bigger issues in digital tech facing us right now is that how do you rebuild trust and information that you access online? And I've been working a bit on papers and a couple of speeches to touch on that and.

The one thing I'll throw out there from an article I wrote a while back, which didn't really get any traction, it might not still, but others in other countries may not, this may not sound familiar to them, but in the US we always had very robust civics education for children. And that has fallen by the wayside in the last at least 10 years, probably much longer. So the lack of civics education generally is a problem because people don't understand.

the actual government systems and how they're designed to work and where there's, you know, goodness in the model. But the other piece, it's also the right place, I think, to help young people develop digital literacy and understand how to consume information in a world that's designed to think for you. It's a world full of algorithmic manipulation. And whether that's coming from hostile actors somewhere else who are planting deep fakes to sow division into society, or if that's just

Frankly, if that's just the commercial business of the platform you're engaging with to keep your eyes on their content longer, it is subtly shaping your worldview and skewing your understanding of reality and leading you potentially pretty far from truth and undermining trust in the process. And we need to give young people tools to take advantage of all the great stuff that's out there in digital tech, but also to apply certain critical thinking filters so they understand what you can and

Jennifer Ewbank (38:17.015)
shouldn't trust.

Francis Gorman (38:20.248)
Look, this has come up so many times, Jennifer, and I think it's critically important. And I really do hope when people listen back to some of these episodes and read these articles that they do take a moment to think. The last episode, the speaker that was on, even she's a cyber psychologist, she spoke about our ability for our eyes to tell us what reality is can no longer be trusted. your ears.

Jennifer Ewbank (38:46.55)
It can, your ears as well.

Francis Gorman (38:49.602)
And you've just said, you know, when we live in a world that shapes our thinking for us, you know, it's a perfect storm for the youth of today. If you can't differentiate reality from synthetic material, you are very susceptible to the message and the platform that you consume because the platforms are tailored to you, not to reality, you know.

Jennifer Ewbank (39:04.813)
Mm-hmm.

Jennifer Ewbank (39:14.85)
Well, the interesting thing is that one would think they're tailored to you, but over time you become tailored to them. And so it is true that an algorithm will start feeding you what you want. over time, not to go too deep in this, but over time one's worldview is shifted and shaped and molded in a way that actually is narrowing our perspectives. And this is one of the big ironies of our time, right? Here we live in a time where there's been

there's more information available to humankind than ever, ever, ever. And I can just pull up a smartphone and find basically almost anything that's ever been known by, you in human knowledge. And yet the average person's view is becoming narrower and narrower because of either there's manipulation by adversaries, but then there's also just convenience, entertainment, and kind of

hits of dopamine from digital validation on a platform somewhere. And so it's not too dissimilar in that last part. It's not too dissimilar than sitting at an electronic slot machine in Vegas. I mean, in terms of the neurochemistry and what's going on. And so this is something I do worry about. And we're going to have to come to terms with this soon and find ways to actually arm people to both take advantage of the amazing things that are available online, the amazing

knowledge and capabilities and connections, all these incredible things that never would happen, innovation. But to do so in a way that protects their ability to actually think critically and apply their own values and come up with their own conclusions and their own ideas about what is true and what isn't. Yeah, I skew a little philosophical on things for someone who comes out of such a pragmatic world, but these are some of the things that I do think about a lot.

Francis Gorman (41:12.174)
And look, they're so important. And I think they're topics that will gain a lot more traction when people start to realize the kind of the subtle erosion of critical thinking that is happening in modern society. you know, we spoke at the start when we were just chatting about the MIT report and cognitive ability and, you know, the degradation it has on neurons in the brain when you start using generative AI versus picking generative AI up once you've done the

the tink and to fine tune it, et cetera. So that's a whole other episode. I'm just watching the clock and I know we're burning down on time. So I'm going to naturally finish here, Jennifer, otherwise we're going to end up. I feel like we could probably stay on for another couple of hours on the topics that are out there. But I'm conscious of time. And look, I really, really do appreciate you joining. I think this has been super insightful and I hope the listeners.

Jennifer Ewbank (41:42.21)
Another episode.

Jennifer Ewbank (41:56.323)
Love it.

Francis Gorman (42:06.99)
comment and give a bit of feedback on this one because it's really been a fantastic episode and thanks very much for coming on.

Jennifer Ewbank (42:14.352)
Frances, it's really my pleasure. I love your podcast series. I love the diversity of topics. I really have enjoyed the opportunity to chat with you today. Look forward to doing so again.

Francis Gorman (42:23.992)
Thanks Jennifer, I look forward to having you back at some stage.

Jennifer Ewbank (42:27.214)
awesome.