Lucas stood confidently, adjusting his blazer as he walked toward the microphone. His speech flowed smoothly from one point to the next, supported by economic models, government reports, and statistics delivered with practiced ease. The audience listened with admiration, and several professors nodded approvingly as he spoke. By the time he finished, the applause was warm and confident, the kind reserved for speakers everyone already respected.
Emily began by acknowledging Lucas’s argument, carefully summarizing the points he had presented about artificial intelligence improving government efficiency. The audience listened politely, expecting a typical rebuttal that would challenge a few details before eventually collapsing under the weight of Harvard’s polished research.
Instead, Emily turned a page in her notebook and said calmly, “Mr. Whitmore’s framework assumes something that simply isn’t true.” The sentence was delivered without hostility, but it carried a quiet confidence that made several people look up from their notes.
Lucas tilted his head slightly, curious now.
“He assumes policymakers actually understand the systems they’re regulating,” Emily continued, letting the statement settle in the air before explaining further. She described how many oversight committees relied heavily on reports written by the very corporations developing the algorithms being reviewed. The conflict of interest, she explained, meant that government officials often approved technologies they barely understood.
