Tech Talks Daily

Why do today's most powerful AI systems still struggle to explain their decisions, repeat the same mistakes, and undermine trust at the very moment we are asking them to take on more responsibility?
In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I'm joined by Artur d'Avila Garcez, Professor of Computer Science at City, St George's University of London, and one of the early pioneers of neurosymbolic AI.
Our conversation cuts through the noise around ever-larger language models and focuses on a deeper question many leaders are now grappling with. If scale alone cannot deliver reliability, accountability, or genuine reasoning, what is missing from today's AI systems?
Artur explains neurosymbolic AI in clear, practical terms as the integration of neural learning with symbolic reasoning. Deep learning excels at pattern recognition across language, images, and sensor data, but it struggles with planning, causality, and guarantees. Symbolic AI, by contrast, offers logic, rules, and explanations, yet falters when faced with messy, unstructured data. Neurosymbolic AI aims to bring these two worlds together, allowing systems to learn from data while reasoning with knowledge, producing AI that can justify decisions and avoid repeating known errors.
We explore why simply adding more parameters and data has failed to solve hallucinations, brittleness, and trust issues. Artur shares how neurosymbolic approaches introduce what he describes as software assurances, ways to reduce the chance of critical errors by design rather than trial and error. From self-driving cars to finance and healthcare, he explains why combining learned behavior with explicit rules mirrors how high-stakes systems already operate in the real world.
A major part of our discussion centers on explainability and accountability. Artur introduces the neurosymbolic cycle, sometimes called the NeSy cycle, which translates knowledge into neural networks and extracts knowledge back out again. This two-way process opens the door to inspection, validation, and responsibility, shifting AI away from opaque black boxes toward systems that can be questioned, audited, and trusted. We also discuss why scaling neurosymbolic AI looks very different from scaling deep learning, with an emphasis on knowledge reuse, efficiency, and model compression rather than ever-growing compute demands.
We also look ahead. From domain-specific deployments already happening today to longer-term questions around energy use, sustainability, and regulation, Artur offers a grounded view on where this field is heading and what signals leaders should watch for as neurosymbolic AI moves from research into real systems.
If you care about building AI that is reliable, explainable, and trustworthy, this conversation offers a refreshing and necessary perspective. As the race toward more capable AI continues, are we finally ready to admit that reasoning, not just scale, may decide what comes next, and what kind of AI do we actually want to live with?
 
Useful Links
Neurosymbolic AI (NeSy) Association website
Artur's personal webpage on the City, St George's University of London page
Co-authored book titled "Neural-Symbolic Learning Systems"
The article about neurosymbolic AI and the road to AGI
The Accountability in AI article
Reasoning in Neurosymbolic AI
Neurosymbolic Deep Learning Semantics

Why does healthcare keep investing in new technology while so many clinicians feel buried under paperwork and admin work that has nothing to do with patient care?
In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I'm joined by Dr. Rihan Javid, psychiatrist, former attorney, and co-founder and president of Edge. Our conversation cuts straight into an issue that rarely gets the attention it deserves, the quiet toll that administrative overload takes on doctors, care teams, and ultimately patients. Nearly half of physicians now link burnout to paperwork rather than clinical work, and Rihan explains why this problem keeps slipping past leadership discussions, even as budgets for digital tools continue to rise.
Drawing on his experience inside hospitals and clinics, Rihan shares how operational design shapes outcomes in ways many healthcare leaders underestimate. We talk about why short-term staffing fixes often create new problems down the line, and how practices that invest in stable, well-trained remote administrative teams see real improvements. That includes faster billing cycles, fewer errors, and more time back for clinicians who want to focus on care rather than forms. What stood out for me was his framing of workforce infrastructure as a performance driver rather than a compliance box to tick.
We also dig into how hybrid operations are becoming the default model. Local clinicians working alongside remote admin teams, supported by AI-assisted workflows, are now common across healthcare. Rihan is clear that while automation and AI can remove friction and cost, human oversight still matters deeply in high-compliance environments. Trust, accuracy, and patient confidence depend on knowing where automation fits and where human judgment must stay firmly in place.
Another part of the discussion that stuck with me was Rihan's idea that stability is emerging as a better success signal than raw cost savings. High turnover may look efficient on paper, but it quietly limits a clinic's ability to grow, retain knowledge, and improve patient outcomes. We unpack why consistent administrative support can influence revenue cycles, satisfaction, and long-term resilience in ways traditional metrics often miss.
If you're a healthcare leader, operator, or technologist trying to understand how AI, remote teams, and smarter operations can work together without losing trust or care quality, this conversation offers plenty to reflect on. As healthcare systems rethink how work gets done behind the scenes, what would it look like if stability and clinician well-being were treated as core performance measures rather than afterthoughts, and how might that change the future of care?
Useful Links
Connect with Dr. Rihan Javid
Edge Health
Rinova AI
Thanks to our sponsors, Alcor, for supporting the show.

*]:pointer-events-auto scroll-mt-(--header-height)" dir="auto" tabindex="-1" data-turn-id= "b1254d76-9782-4038-9aa8-382a2395255e" data-testid= "conversation-turn-13" data-scroll-anchor="false" data-turn="user">  





*]:pointer-events-auto scroll-mt-[calc(var(--header-height)+min(200px,max(70px,20svh)))]" dir="auto" tabindex="-1" data-turn-id= "80196f3d-a0ce-44b9-917e-9b4df5d25b93" data-testid= "conversation-turn-14" data-scroll-anchor="true" data-turn= "assistant"> Why do small business leaders keep buying more software yet still feel like they are drowning in logins, dashboards, and unfinished work?
In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I sit down with Jesse Lipson, founder and CEO of Levitate, to unpack a frustration I hear from business owners almost daily. After years of being pitched yet another tool, many leaders now spend hours each week troubleshooting software instead of serving customers. Jesse brings a grounded perspective shaped by decades of building SaaS companies, including bootstrapping ShareFile before its acquisition by Citrix, and what stood out to me immediately was how clearly he articulates where the current software model has broken down for small businesses.
We talk about why adding more apps has not translated into better outcomes, especially for teams without dedicated specialists in marketing, finance, or sales. Jesse explains how traditional software often solves only part of the problem, leaving owners to become accidental experts in accounting, marketing strategy, or customer communications just to make the tools usable. From there, our conversation shifts toward what he believes will actually matter as AI adoption matures. Rather than chasing full automation or shiny new dashboards, Jesse argues that the real opportunity lies in blending intelligence with human guidance, allowing AI to work quietly behind the scenes while people remain the face of authentic relationships.
A big part of our discussion centers on trust and connection in an AI-saturated world. Jesse shares why customers have become incredibly good at spotting automated communication and why relationship-based businesses cannot afford to lose the human element. We explore how AI can act as a second brain, helping business owners remember details, follow up at the right moments, and show up more thoughtfully, without crossing the line into impersonal automation that turns customers away. His examples, from marketing emails to customer support, make it clear that technology should support better relationships rather than replace them.
We also look ahead to what small businesses should realistically focus on as AI evolves. Jesse offers practical guidance on getting started, from everyday use of conversational AI, to building internal documentation that allows systems to work more effectively, and eventually moving toward agent-based workflows that can take on real operational tasks. Throughout the conversation, he keeps returning to the same idea, that AI works best when it helps people become the kind of business leaders they already want to be, more present, more consistent, and more human.
If you are a founder, operator, or small business leader feeling overwhelmed by tools that promise productivity but deliver friction, this episode offers a refreshing reset. As AI becomes more capable and more embedded in daily work, the real question is not how many systems you deploy, but whether they help you build stronger, more genuine relationships, so how are you choosing to use AI to support the human side of your business rather than bury it?




Useful Links
Connect with Jesse Lipson
Connect with Jesse on X
Learn more about Levitate

What happens when power, rather than compute, becomes the limiting factor for AI, robotics, and industrial automation?
In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I'm joined by Ramesh Narasimhan from Nyobolt to unpack a challenge that is quietly reshaping modern infrastructure. As AI training and inference workloads grow more dynamic, power demand is no longer predictable or steady. It can spike and drop in milliseconds, creating stress on systems that were never designed for this level of volatility. We talk about why data center operators, automation leaders, and industrial firms are being forced to rethink how energy is delivered, managed, and scaled.
Our conversation moves beyond AI headlines and into the less visible constraints holding progress back. Ramesh explains how automation growth, particularly in robotics and autonomous mobile robot fleets, has exposed hidden inefficiencies. Charging downtime, thermal limits, and oversized systems are eroding productivity in warehouses and factories that aim to run around the clock. Instead of expanding physical footprints or adding redundant capacity, many operators are questioning whether the energy layer itself has become outdated.
One of the themes that stood out for me is how energy has shifted from a background utility to a board-level concern. Power density, resilience, and cycle life are now discussed with the same urgency as compute performance or sensor accuracy. Ramesh shares why executives across logistics, automotive, advanced manufacturing, and AI infrastructure are starting to see energy strategy as a direct driver of uptime, cost control, and competitive advantage.
We also explore the industry-wide push toward high-power, high-uptime operations. As businesses demand systems that can stay online continuously, the pressure is on energy technologies to respond faster, charge quicker, and occupy less space. This raises difficult questions about oversizing infrastructure for rare peak loads versus designing smarter systems that can flex in real time without waste.
If you are building or operating AI clusters, robotics platforms, or industrial automation at scale, this episode offers a clear-eyed look at why energy systems may be the next major bottleneck and opportunity. As power becomes inseparable from performance, how ready is your organization to treat energy as a strategic asset rather than an afterthought?

What happens when artificial intelligence starts accelerating cyberattacks faster than most organizations can test, fix, and respond?
In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I sat down with Sonali Shah, CEO of Cobalt, to unpack what real-world penetration testing data is revealing about the current state of enterprise security. With more than two decades in cybersecurity and a background that spans finance, engineering, product, and strategy, Sonali brings a grounded, operator-level view of where security teams are keeping up and where they are quietly falling behind.
Our conversation centers on what happens when AI moves from an experiment to an attack surface. Sonali explains how threat actors are already using the same AI-enabled tools as defenders to automate reconnaissance, identify vulnerabilities, and speed up exploitation. We discuss why this is no longer theoretical, referencing findings from companies like Anthropic, including examples where models such as Claude have demonstrated both power and unpredictability. The takeaway is sobering but balanced. AI can automate a large share of the work, but human expertise still plays a defining role, both for attackers and defenders.
We also dig into Cobalt's latest State of Pentesting data, including why median remediation times for serious vulnerabilities have improved while overall closure rates remain stubbornly low. Sonali breaks down why large enterprises struggle more than smaller organizations, how legacy systems slow progress, and why generative AI applications currently show some of the highest risk with some of the lowest fix rates. As more companies rush to deploy AI agents into production, this gap becomes harder to ignore.
One of the strongest themes in this episode is the shift from point-in-time testing to continuous, programmatic risk reduction. Sonali explains what effective continuous pentesting looks like in practice, why automation alone creates noise and friction, and how human-led testing helps teams move from assumptions to evidence. We also address a persistent confidence gap, where leaders believe their security posture is strong, even when testing shows otherwise.
We close by tackling one of the biggest myths in cybersecurity. Security is never finished. It is a constant process of preparation, testing, learning, and improvement. The organizations that perform best accept this reality and build security into daily operations rather than treating it as a one-off task.
So as AI continues to accelerate both innovation and attacks, how confident are you that your security program is keeping pace, and what would continuous testing change inside your organization? I would love to hear your thoughts.
Useful Links
Connect with Sonali Shah
Learn more about Cobalt
Check out the Cobalt Learning Center
State of Pentesting Report
Thanks to our sponsors, Alcor, for supporting the show.