The $70 Million Question
Why AI Validation Is Now Make-or-Break for 2025 Investment Decisions
Welcome to Silicon Sands News—the go-to newsletter for investors, senior executives, and founders navigating the intersection of AI, deep tech, and innovation. Join ~35,000 industry leaders across all 50 U.S. states and 113 countries—including top VCs from Sequoia Capital, Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), Accel, NEA, Bessemer Venture Partners, Khosla Ventures, and Kleiner Perkins.
Our readership also includes decision-makers from Apple, Amazon, NVIDIA, and OpenAI, some of the most innovative companies shaping the future of technology. Subscribe to stay ahead of the trends defining the next wave of disruption in AI, enterprise software, and beyond.
This week, we will examine why investors, founders, and executives need to rethink AI validation as a competitive advantage rather than a regulatory burden.
Let's Dive Into It...
The era of treating AI validation as an afterthought is definitively over. What began as a technical exercise confined to data science teams has evolved into a strategic business imperative that touches every aspect of organizational decision-making, from product development to market positioning to investor relations.
This transformation reflects a fundamental shift in how markets, regulators, and stakeholders view artificial intelligence. No longer seen as experimental technology, AI systems are increasingly recognized as critical infrastructure that requires the same rigorous validation approaches applied to other mission-critical systems. The difference is that AI validation encompasses not just technical performance, but also ethical considerations, regulatory compliance, and market acceptance in ways that traditional software validation never required.
For investors, founders, and executives operating in this new landscape, understanding AI validation has become as important as understanding the underlying technology itself. Organizations that recognize this shift early and implement comprehensive validation strategies are discovering significant competitive advantages, while those that continue to treat validation as a compliance afterthought face mounting risks that extend far beyond regulatory penalties.
Key Takeaways
For Investors:
AI validation frameworks are becoming critical due diligence factors as the regulatory landscape evolves, with the EU AI Act imposing penalties up to 7% of global revenue for serious violations
Companies demonstrating proactive validation approaches show lower regulatory risk profiles and faster market entry capabilities
The shift from reactive compliance to strategic validation creates new investment opportunities in validation tools and services
For Founders:
Early adoption of comprehensive validation frameworks provides a competitive advantage in increasingly regulated markets
FDA's evolving guidance creates clearer pathways for AI medical device approval, reducing regulatory uncertainty for healthcare AI startups
Validation documentation accelerates both regulatory approval processes and investor confidence during fundraising
For Senior Executives:
AI validation has evolved from a technical checkbox to a strategic business function requiring board-level oversight
Cross-functional validation teams consistently outperform siloed technical approaches in both compliance outcomes and innovation speed.
Organizations treating validation as a strategic capability rather than a compliance burden are gaining measurable competitive advantages.
The Regulatory Foundation: From Voluntary Guidelines to Mandatory Requirements
The regulatory landscape for AI validation has undergone a significant transformation over the past two years, shifting from voluntary best practices to mandatory requirements with substantial financial implications. This shift represents one of the most important developments affecting AI companies and their investors.
The European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act stands as the world's first comprehensive AI regulatory framework, and its implementation timeline demonstrates the urgency with which regulators are moving. As confirmed by the European Parliament, "the ban of AI systems posing unacceptable risks started to apply on 2 February 2025". This represents more than symbolic action—organizations deploying high-risk AI systems now face administrative fines of up to €35 million or 7% of their global annual revenue, whichever is higher.
These penalties dwarf most previous technology regulations. To put this into perspective, the EU AI Act's maximum penalties are more than double the highest GDPR fines, creating a new category of regulatory risk that investors must consider when conducting their due diligence processes. For a company with $1 billion in annual revenue, a maximum AI Act penalty could reach $70 million—a sum that would materially impact most organizations' financial performance and market valuation.
The United States has taken a different but equally significant approach through the National Institute of Standards and Technology's AI Risk Management Framework. Released on January 26, 2023, the NIST AI RMF represents a consensus-driven approach developed through extensive collaboration with private and public sectors. While voluntary, the framework has quickly become the de facto standard for AI risk management in the United States, with many organizations adopting its principles to demonstrate due diligence to regulators, customers, and investors.
The NIST framework's influence extends beyond its voluntary status. As NIST explains, the framework is "intended for voluntary use and to improve the ability to incorporate trustworthiness considerations into the design, development, use, and evaluation of AI products, services, and systems". However, its adoption by federal agencies and integration into procurement requirements has made it effectively mandatory for many organizations seeking government contracts or partnerships.
Perhaps most significantly for the healthcare sector, the Food and Drug Administration has fundamentally restructured its approach to AI and machine learning medical devices. The FDA acknowledges that "the FDA's traditional paradigm of medical device regulation was not designed for adaptive artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies". This recognition has led to the development of an entirely new regulatory framework specifically designed for AI systems.
The FDA's evolution on AI regulation demonstrates the complexity of validating adaptive systems. Traditional medical device regulation assumed static functionality—a device would perform the same way throughout its lifecycle. AI systems, by contrast, are designed to learn and adapt, creating regulatory challenges that require entirely new approaches. The FDA's response has been comprehensive, including the January 2021 AI/ML Software as a Medical Device Action Plan, followed by a series of guidance documents culminating in the January 2025 Draft Guidance on AI-Enabled Device Software Functions.
This regulatory evolution creates both challenges and opportunities for organizations developing AI systems. Companies that have anticipated these changes and built validation capabilities proactively find themselves with significant competitive advantages. Those who have treated validation as a future concern now face the challenge of retrofitting their systems and processes to meet rapidly evolving requirements.
The financial implications extend beyond direct penalties. Organizations with inadequate validation face longer regulatory approval times, increased scrutiny from investors, and potential market access restrictions. Conversely, companies with mature validation practices are discovering that their investment in compliance infrastructure provides unexpected competitive advantages, including enhanced customer trust, increased partnership opportunities, and increased investor confidence.
The Three Dimensions of Strategic AI Validation
Understanding AI validation requires recognizing that it operates across three interconnected dimensions, each with distinct requirements and stakeholder expectations. Organizations that excel in all three dimensions consistently outperform those that focus on only one or two areas.
Technical Validation forms the foundation of any AI system's reliability. This encompasses traditional machine learning metrics, such as precision, recall, and accuracy, but extends far beyond basic performance measures. Modern technical validation includes adversarial testing, edge case analysis, and continuous monitoring for model drift and performance degradation. The goal is to ensure that AI systems perform reliably across diverse scenarios and maintain their performance over time.
Technical validation has undergone significant evolution as AI systems have become increasingly complex. Early machine learning systems could be validated using relatively straightforward statistical methods applied to held-out test datasets. Today's AI systems, particularly large language models and multimodal systems, require validation approaches that can assess performance across vast ranges of inputs and use cases. This complexity has driven the development of new validation methodologies, including the generation of synthetic data for testing edge cases and the development of automated adversarial testing frameworks.
Safety and Compliance Validation addresses the multi-faceted requirements of responsible AI deployment across three critical areas. Security and compliance monitoring ensure adherence to data privacy regulations, encryption standards, and access controls, thereby maintaining data integrity and confidentiality. Maintaining a healthy AI compliance posture is more than just ticking boxes; it requires viewing compliance as a core aspect of modern technology-driven operations.
Ethical considerations examine bias mitigation, transparency in model outputs, and respect for user data. This dimension has gained particular importance as AI systems are deployed in high-stakes applications affecting human welfare. The challenge lies not just in identifying potential biases but in developing systematic approaches to mitigate them while maintaining system performance.
Governance and oversight clarify accountability for model updates, error handling, and strategic AI decisions. This includes establishing transparent chains of responsibility for AI system behavior, implementing appropriate human oversight mechanisms, and creating processes for responding to system failures or unexpected behaviors. Effective governance structures enable organizations to react swiftly to changing requirements while maintaining appropriate controls over the behavior of AI systems.
Market Validation demonstrates that AI systems deliver real-world value to customers while building stakeholder trust. This dimension often receives less attention than technical or compliance validation, but it may be the most important for long-term business success. Market validation includes transparent documentation of AI capabilities and limitations, third-party certifications where available, and clear communication about how AI systems make decisions.
Market validation also encompasses customer acceptance and adoption metrics. Even technically excellent AI systems can fail in the market if users don't trust them or understand how to use them effectively. This has led to increased emphasis on explainable AI and user experience design for AI-powered applications.
The interconnected nature of these three dimensions means that weakness in any one area can undermine the entire validation effort. A technically excellent AI system that fails ethical review will face market resistance and regulatory scrutiny. A compliant system that doesn't deliver market value will struggle to justify its development costs. A market-successful system with technical flaws will eventually face performance issues that damage customer trust and regulatory standing.
Organizations that recognize these interdependencies and build integrated validation strategies consistently outperform those that treat each dimension separately. This integrated approach requires cross-functional teams that include technical experts, legal and compliance professionals, domain specialists, and business stakeholders. The most successful organizations have found that this collaborative approach not only improves validation outcomes but also accelerates innovation by identifying potential issues early in the development process.
Industry-Specific Validation Challenges and Opportunities
Different industries face distinct validation challenges due to their unique regulatory environments, risk profiles, and stakeholder expectations. Understanding these industry-specific requirements has become crucial for investors evaluating AI companies and executives planning AI implementations.
Healthcare represents the most complex validation environment, as it combines life-or-death consequences with rapidly evolving regulatory frameworks. The FDA's acknowledgment that traditional medical device regulation wasn't designed for adaptive AI systems has led to an entirely new regulatory approach. The agency's AI/ML Software as a Medical Device Action Plan, published in January 2021, established a framework for regulating AI systems that can learn and adapt over time.
The FDA's approach recognizes that AI medical devices present unique challenges. Traditional medical devices maintain consistent functionality throughout their lifecycle, making validation relatively straightforward. AI systems, by contrast, are designed to improve their performance based on new data and experience. This creates regulatory challenges around ensuring continued safety and effectiveness as systems evolve.
The FDA has responded with innovative regulatory approaches, including predetermined change control plans that allow certain types of AI system updates to be made without requiring new regulatory submissions. This approach strikes a balance between the need for regulatory oversight and the reality that AI systems must be able to adapt and continually improve. For healthcare AI companies, understanding and implementing these new regulatory pathways has become a critical competitive advantage.
Healthcare validation also requires addressing unique ethical considerations around patient privacy, informed consent, and health equity. AI systems trained on data from specific populations may not perform equally well across all demographic groups, creating both ethical concerns and regulatory risks. Successful healthcare AI companies have invested heavily in diverse training datasets and bias detection methodologies to address these challenges.
Financial services face a different set of validation challenges, primarily centered on risk management, regulatory compliance, and customer protection. The sector's existing regulatory framework, encompassing requirements related to fair lending, consumer protection, and systemic risk management, creates a complex environment for AI validation.
Financial services AI validation must address algorithmic fairness in lending decisions, transparency in credit scoring, and systemic risk from automated trading systems. The sector's regulators have been particularly focused on ensuring that AI systems don't perpetuate or amplify existing biases in financial services. This has led to increased emphasis on explainable AI and algorithmic auditing in financial applications.
The U.S. Treasury Department's December 2024 report on "Artificial Intelligence in Financial Services" highlighted the importance of comprehensive validation frameworks for financial AI systems. The report emphasized the need for financial institutions to implement robust testing and monitoring procedures to ensure AI systems perform as intended across diverse market conditions and customer populations.
Critical Infrastructure sectors, including energy, transportation, and telecommunications, face validation challenges related to system reliability, cybersecurity, and public safety. AI systems controlling power grids, transportation networks, or communication systems must meet extremely high reliability standards while remaining resilient against both accidental failures and deliberate attacks.
These sectors often borrow validation approaches from aerospace and nuclear industries, including formal verification methods, redundant systems, and extensive testing protocols. The challenge lies in adapting these traditional approaches to AI systems that may behave in ways that are difficult to predict or verify using conventional methods.
Consumer Applications present a different validation challenge, balancing innovation speed with growing consumer awareness and regulatory scrutiny. While consumer AI applications may not face the same life-or-death consequences as healthcare or critical infrastructure applications, they often process vast amounts of personal data and influence millions of users' daily decisions.
Consumer AI validation increasingly focuses on privacy protection, content moderation, and user safety. The challenge for consumer AI companies is implementing comprehensive validation frameworks while maintaining the rapid development cycles that characterize the consumer technology sector. This has led to increased adoption of automated testing frameworks and continuous monitoring systems that can provide validation feedback without slowing development velocity.
The industry-specific nature of AI validation creates both challenges and opportunities for investors and executives. Companies that develop deep expertise in their sector's specific validation requirements often find significant competitive advantages. Conversely, companies that attempt to apply generic validation approaches across different industries may struggle to meet sector-specific requirements and the expectations of stakeholders.
Validation as a Competitive Advantage
The organizations that are succeeding in the new AI validation landscape share common characteristics in how they approach validation strategically rather than reactively. These patterns provide a roadmap for executives seeking to transform validation from a compliance burden into a competitive advantage.
Cross-Functional Integration represents the most significant departure from traditional software validation approaches. Successful AI validation requires expertise that spans technical, legal, ethical, and business domains. Organizations that have built cross-functional validation teams consistently outperform those that treat validation as a purely technical exercise.
These cross-functional teams typically include data scientists and ML engineers for technical validation, legal and compliance professionals for regulatory requirements, domain experts for industry-specific considerations, and business stakeholders for market validation. The key insight is that these different perspectives must be integrated throughout the validation process, not just consulted at the end.
The most effective organizations have found that cross-functional validation teams also accelerate innovation by identifying potential issues early in the development process. Rather than discovering compliance or market acceptance problems after significant development investment, integrated teams can address these concerns during the design phase, ultimately reducing both development time and validation costs.
Risk-based validation strategies enable organizations to allocate validation resources efficiently while ensuring adequate oversight for high-risk applications. This approach, aligned with regulatory frameworks such as the EU AI Act's risk-based classification system, focuses intensive validation efforts on applications with the highest potential impact, while streamlining processes for lower-risk use cases.
Risk-based validation requires organizations to develop sophisticated risk assessment capabilities that can evaluate AI systems across multiple dimensions, including technical complexity, potential impact on individuals and society, regulatory requirements, and business criticality. The most successful organizations have developed standardized risk assessment frameworks that can be consistently applied across various AI projects and business units.
This approach also enables organizations to demonstrate regulatory compliance more effectively by showing that validation efforts are proportionate to actual risks. Regulators are increasingly expecting organizations to justify their validation approaches based on systematic risk assessments, rather than applying uniform processes across all AI systems.
Continuous Validation and Monitoring addresses the unique challenge that AI systems can change behavior over time as they encounter new data or operating conditions. Traditional software validation assumes that a system validated at deployment will continue to perform consistently. AI systems require ongoing validation to ensure they maintain their performance and compliance characteristics as they evolve.
Continuous validation encompasses both automated monitoring systems that can detect performance degradation or bias drift, as well as periodic comprehensive reviews that assess whether AI systems continue to meet their original validation criteria. The most sophisticated organizations have implemented real-time monitoring systems that can detect and respond to validation issues before they impact users or violate regulatory requirements.
This approach requires a substantial investment in monitoring infrastructure and automated validation. However, organizations that have made this investment report significant competitive advantages. They can deploy AI systems with greater confidence, respond more quickly to changing requirements, and demonstrate ongoing compliance to regulators and customers.
Documentation and Transparency have evolved from compliance requirements to strategic assets that enable faster market entry and stronger customer relationships. Comprehensive validation documentation serves multiple purposes: it satisfies regulatory requirements, supports sales and partnership discussions, informs investor due diligence, and enables internal knowledge transfer.
The most effective organizations have developed documentation strategies that create value beyond compliance. This includes public transparency reports that build customer trust, technical documentation that accelerates partnership development, and standardized validation reports that streamline regulatory submissions.
Transparency also extends to external communication about AI capabilities and limitations. Organizations that proactively communicate about their AI systems' validation approaches and limitations often find that this transparency builds rather than undermines customer confidence. This contrasts with organizations that attempt to minimize discussion of AI system limitations, which frequently face greater skepticism from customers and regulators.
Validation as Innovation Enabler represents the most sophisticated approach to AI validation. Rather than viewing validation as a constraint on innovation, leading organizations have found ways to use validation processes to accelerate and improve their AI development efforts.
This includes utilizing validation feedback to enhance AI system design, leveraging validation infrastructure for rapid prototyping and testing, and employing validation expertise to identify new market opportunities. Organizations that have achieved this level of validation maturity often find that their validation capabilities become a source of competitive advantage that is difficult for competitors to replicate.
The strategic implementation of AI validation requires a significant organizational commitment and investment. However, organizations that have made this commitment are discovering substantial returns, including reduced regulatory risk, faster market entry, stronger customer relationships, and improved investor confidence.
Investment and Market Implications
The transformation of AI validation from a technical exercise to a strategic imperative creates significant implications for investors, market dynamics, and competitive positioning. Understanding these implications has become crucial for making informed investment decisions and strategic business choices in the AI sector.
New Investment Risk Categories have emerged as regulatory frameworks mature and enforcement begins. The EU AI Act's penalty structure, with fines up to 7% of global revenue, creates a new category of regulatory risk that must be factored into investment valuations and due diligence processes. For investors, this means that AI validation maturity has become as important as technical capabilities when evaluating potential investments.
Traditional technology investment due diligence focused primarily on technical feasibility, market opportunity, and team capabilities. AI investments now require additional evaluation of regulatory compliance strategies, validation frameworks, and governance structures. Investors who fail to assess these factors may find their portfolio companies facing unexpected regulatory challenges that materially impact valuations and exit opportunities.
The regulatory risk extends beyond direct penalties to include market access restrictions, customer acceptance challenges, and partnership limitations. Organizations with inadequate validation may find themselves excluded from specific markets or customer segments, particularly in highly regulated industries such as healthcare and financial services. This creates a bifurcated market where companies with strong validation capabilities can access premium opportunities while those with weak validation face increasingly limited options.
Competitive Differentiation Through Validation has become a significant factor in market positioning and customer acquisition. Organizations with mature validation capabilities can offer customers greater confidence in the reliability, regulatory compliance, and ethical operation of their AI systems. This has proven particularly valuable in enterprise sales, where customers increasingly require detailed validation documentation before approving the deployment of AI systems.
The competitive advantage extends to partnership opportunities, where organizations with strong validation capabilities are preferred partners for other companies seeking to integrate AI into their operations. This has created a network effect where validation leaders gain access to better partnership opportunities, which in turn strengthen their market position and validation capabilities.
Some organizations have begun marketing their validation capabilities directly, utilizing transparency reports and third-party certifications as key differentiators in the market. This represents a significant shift from traditional technology marketing, where companies typically emphasized features and performance rather than compliance and governance capabilities.
Market Consolidation Drivers are emerging as validation requirements create barriers to entry and operational challenges for smaller organizations. Comprehensive AI validation necessitates substantial investments in expertise, infrastructure, and ongoing monitoring capabilities. This creates advantages for larger organizations that can spread these costs across multiple AI systems and business units.
The complexity of validation requirements also favors organizations with existing regulatory expertise and compliance infrastructure. Companies in regulated industries, such as healthcare and financial services, may find it easier to extend their existing compliance capabilities to AI systems than technology companies that are building compliance capabilities from scratch.
However, this consolidation pressure also creates opportunities for specialized validation service providers and technology vendors. Organizations that cannot justify building comprehensive internal validation capabilities may increasingly rely on external providers for validation services, creating new market opportunities for companies that can deliver validation expertise as a service.
Valuation Impact and Investor Preferences are beginning to reflect the importance of validation capabilities in long-term business success. Investors are increasingly willing to pay premiums for companies with demonstrated maturity in validation, particularly in regulated industries where validation capabilities directly impact market access and revenue potential.
The valuation impact extends beyond risk mitigation to growth potential. Companies with strong validation capabilities can enter new markets and customer segments more quickly, pursue partnerships with regulated organizations, and scale their operations with greater confidence. These growth advantages are beginning to be reflected in valuation multiples and investment terms.
Investor preferences are also shifting toward companies that treat validation as a strategic capability rather than a compliance burden. This includes companies that have integrated validation into their product development processes, built validation expertise as a core competency, and demonstrated the ability to use validation capabilities for competitive advantage.
Ecosystem Development and Innovation around AI validation is creating new market opportunities and investment categories. The complexity of AI validation has driven demand for specialized tools, services, and platforms that enable organizations to implement comprehensive validation frameworks more efficiently.
This includes automated testing and monitoring platforms, bias detection and mitigation tools, regulatory compliance management systems, and validation-as-a-service providers. The market for these validation-focused solutions is growing rapidly as organizations recognize the strategic importance of validation capabilities.
The ecosystem development also includes new professional services categories, such as AI validation consulting, regulatory strategy advisory services, and specialized legal services for AI compliance. These service categories represent significant market opportunities for organizations that can develop deep expertise in AI validation requirements and best practices.
The investment and market implications of AI validation transformation extend far beyond compliance costs to fundamental changes in competitive dynamics, market structure, and investment criteria. Organizations and investors that recognize and adapt to these changes early are positioning themselves for significant advantages in the evolving AI market landscape.
Let's Wrap This Up
The transformation of AI validation from a technical afterthought to a strategic business imperative represents one of the most significant shifts in the technology sector over the past two years. This change affects every stakeholder in the AI ecosystem, from individual developers to global enterprises to institutional investors.
For investors, AI validation has become a critical due diligence factor that directly impacts both risk assessment and evaluation of growth potential. The regulatory landscape, led by the EU AI Act's substantial penalties and the FDA's comprehensive new frameworks, has created new categories of investment risk that cannot be ignored. However, this same regulatory evolution has also created competitive advantages for organizations that have invested proactively in validation capabilities. Investors who develop expertise in assessing validation maturity will be better positioned to identify promising opportunities and avoid costly regulatory failures.
The investment implications extend beyond risk mitigation to fundamental changes in market dynamics and competitive positioning. Companies with strong validation capabilities are gaining access to premium market opportunities, preferred partnership positions, and customer relationships that create sustainable competitive advantages. These advantages are beginning to be reflected in valuation multiples and investment terms, suggesting that validation capabilities will become increasingly important factors in investment decision-making.
For founders and executives, the message is equally clear: AI validation must be treated as a core business capability rather than a compliance burden. Organizations that integrate validation into their product development processes, build cross-functional validation teams, and use validation capabilities for competitive differentiation are consistently outperforming those that treat validation reactively.
The strategic approach to validation requires significant organizational commitment and investment, but the returns are substantial. Companies with mature validation capabilities report faster regulatory approvals, stronger customer relationships, reduced operational risks, and improved investor confidence. Perhaps most importantly, they are discovering that validation capabilities enable rather than constrain innovation by providing frameworks for rapid, confident deployment of AI systems.
The healthcare sector provides a particularly compelling example of how validation can become a competitive advantage. The FDA's new regulatory frameworks, while complex, create clearer pathways for AI medical device approval for companies that understand and implement appropriate validation strategies. Healthcare AI companies that have invested in validation capabilities are finding themselves with significant advantages in regulatory approval times, customer acceptance, and partnership opportunities.
Looking forward, the importance of AI validation is expected to increase as regulatory frameworks mature, customer expectations evolve, and competitive pressures intensify. The organizations that recognize this trend early and build validation capabilities as core competencies will be best positioned to succeed in the evolving AI landscape.
The ecosystem developing around AI validation also presents significant opportunities for investors and entrepreneurs. The complexity of validation requirements is driving demand for specialized tools, services, and platforms that enable organizations to implement comprehensive validation frameworks more efficiently. This includes everything from automated testing platforms to validation consulting services to regulatory compliance management systems.
Perhaps most importantly, the transformation of AI validation represents a maturation of the AI industry itself. The shift from experimental technology to critical business infrastructure requires corresponding changes in how AI systems are developed, deployed, and managed. Organizations that embrace this maturation and build appropriate validation capabilities will be the ones that ultimately deliver on AI's transformative potential while managing its inherent risks.
The choice facing organizations today is not whether to invest in AI validation, but how quickly and strategically they can build validation capabilities that create a competitive advantage. Those who view validation as an opportunity rather than an obligation will be the ones who shape the future of AI deployment and capture the greatest value from this transformative technology.
The journey towards truly open, responsible AI is ongoing. We will realize AI's full potential to benefit society through informed decision-making and collaborative efforts. As we explore and invest in this exciting field, let’s remain committed to fostering an AI ecosystem that is innovative, ethical, accessible to all, and informed.
If you have questions, you can contact me via the chat in Substack.
UPCOMING EVENTS:
RECENT PODCASTS:
🔊NEW PODCAST: Build to Last Podcast with Ethan Kho & Dr. Seth Dobrin.
Youtube: https://lnkd.in/ebXdKfKs
Spotify: https://lnkd.in/eUZvGZiX
Apple Podcasts: https://lnkd.in/eiW4zqne
🔊SAP LeanX: AI governance is a complex and multi-faceted undertaking that requires foresight on how AI will develop in the future. 🎙️https://hubs.ly/Q02ZSdRP0
🔊Channel Insights Podcast, host Dinara Bakirova https://lnkd.in/dXdQXeYR
🔊 BetterTech, hosted by Jocelyn Houle. December 4, 2024
🔊 AI and the Future of Work published November 4, 2024
🔊 Humain Podcast published September 19, 2024
🔊 Geeks Of The Valley. published September 15, 2024
🔊 HC Group published September 11, 2024
🔊 American Banker published September 10, 2024