Welcome to the Business of Tech

AI's Growing Influence and Political

The US Midterm Elections and AI Policy

New Zealand's Election and AI Policy

AI in the Public Sector: Challenges and

Data Centers and Their Role in AI

Measuring AI's Impact on the Economy

Evaluating AI Rollouts Effectively

The Need for Scientific Approach in AI

Supporting Businesses in AI Adoption

Prioritizing AI Governance and Enforcement

Future Trends in AI Research and Development

The Growing Concerns of AI's Potential Risks

Wrapping Up and Looking Ahead

Podcast Information and Call to Action

Everyone wants an AI-powered economy. But who takes responsibility when the technology gets things wrong, and how do we make sure everyone shares the long-promised productivity gains?

That’s at the heart of this week’s episode of The Business of Tech, recorded as the US absorbs its midterm election results and New Zealand waits for special votes to help determine the next government.

My guest, Victoria University of Wellington AI researcher Dr Andrew Lensen, argues that getting value from AI requires more than buying software, building data centres and telling staff to embrace AI. It needs leadership, accountability and evidence that the investment actually delivers.

For the next government, Lensen’s starting point is to have someone in charge. A senior minister responsible for AI would give the issue political weight. An independent body, the equivalent of the Privacy Commissioner, could help turn broad promises about responsible technology into practical oversight.

Explainability and an appeal process

Lensen sees merit in an AI commissioner, with powers to investigate complaints and scrutinise automated decisions. If a government agency uses AI to make a consequential decision about you, there should be an explanation and a way to challenge it.

But rules are only part of the equation. Leaders also need their people on board.

Selling AI primarily as a vehicle for job cuts, as the coalition Government did earlier this year, risks sabotaging its introduction. The employees who understand an organisation’s processes are often best placed to identify where the technology could help. Give them a reason to fear it, and that knowledge becomes harder to unlock.

“As soon as you say, hey, by the way, we're going to get you to do this, and then we'll fire you. I mean, you're really not going to get much progress being made,” Lensen says.

Then there’s the productivity question. Are organisations measuring improvements, or simply assuming that more AI means better performance?

“Because there's so much where at the moment it feels like it's on vibes.” 

Better metrics on AI's impact

Lensen wants proper comparisons between existing processes and AI-assisted alternatives, with success measures set upfront. Time saved, fewer complaints and better outcomes matter more than enthusiastic anecdotes.

We also tackle the data-centre boom. What should New Zealand expect in return for supplying land, electricity and infrastructure? Could access to computing capacity help local researchers and startups, rather than simply serving offshore demand?

This isn’t a call to stop experimenting. It’s a challenge to get more focused about what success looks like, articulate who benefits and who answers when things go wrong.

Listen to this week’s The Business of Tech in full, streaming on iHeartRadio, Spotify, Apple or wherever you get your podcasts.

Everyone wants an AI-powered economy. But who takes responsibility when the technology gets things wrong, and how do we make sure everyone shares the long-promised productivity gains?
That&rsquo;s at the heart of this week&rsquo;s episode of The Business of Tech, recorded as the US absorbs its midterm election results and New Zealand waits for special votes to help determine the next government.
My guest, Victoria University of Wellington AI researcher Dr Andrew Lensen, argues that getting value from AI requires more than buying software, building data centres and telling staff to embrace AI. It needs leadership, accountability and evidence that the investment actually delivers.
For the next government, Lensen&rsquo;s starting point is to have someone in charge. A senior minister responsible for AI would give the issue political weight. An independent body, the equivalent of the Privacy Commissioner, could help turn broad promises about responsible technology into practical oversight.
Explainability and an appeal process
Lensen sees merit in an AI commissioner, with powers to investigate complaints and scrutinise automated decisions. If a government agency uses AI to make a consequential decision about you, there should be an explanation and a way to challenge it.
But rules are only part of the equation. Leaders also need their people on board.
Selling AI primarily as a vehicle for job cuts, as the coalition Government did earlier this year, risks sabotaging its introduction. The employees who understand an organisation&rsquo;s processes are often best placed to identify where the technology could help. Give them a reason to fear it, and that knowledge becomes harder to unlock.
&ldquo;As soon as you say, hey, by the way, we're going to get you to do this, and then we'll fire you. I mean, you're really not going to get much progress being made,&rdquo; Lensen says.
Then there&rsquo;s the productivity question. Are organisations measuring improvements, or simply assuming that more AI means better performance?
&ldquo;Because there's so much where at the moment it feels like it's on vibes.&rdquo;&nbsp;
Better metrics on AI's impact
Lensen wants proper comparisons between existing processes and AI-assisted alternatives, with success measures set upfront. Time saved, fewer complaints and better outcomes matter more than enthusiastic anecdotes.
We also tackle the data-centre boom. What should New Zealand expect in return for supplying land, electricity and infrastructure? Could access to computing capacity help local researchers and startups, rather than simply serving offshore demand?
This isn&rsquo;t a call to stop experimenting. It&rsquo;s a challenge to get more focused about what success looks like, articulate who benefits and who answers when things go wrong.
Listen to this week&rsquo;s The Business of Tech in full, streaming on iHeartRadio, Spotify, Apple or wherever you get your podcasts.

New government, new AI rules?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/93d9505c-6013-4284-ac7a-b4fe0167e4ed/transcript

The Digital Sovereignty Dilemma

Microsoft's Role in New Zealand's Tech

Balancing Sovereignty and Global

Defining Digital Sovereignty

The Cost of Sovereignty and Global Benefits

AI and Cybersecurity Challenges

The Future of AI in New Zealand

Navigating Cloud Security and Data Protection

New Zealand's Digital Sovereignty Position

Advice for Business Leaders

Key Takeaways on Digital Sovereignty

New Zealand runs on American technology. But what happens when the country behind those platforms starts looking like a less dependable partner?

That question hangs over the latest episode of The Business of Tech, as Microsoft faces growing pressure to give governments and businesses more control over the systems they rely on.

My guests are Lewis Mills, Microsoft New Zealand’s Corporate Affairs Director and Special Counsel for National Security, and Blake Herzinger, Microsoft Asia’s Defence and National Security Government Affairs Lead. 

Both recently participated in the Aspen Institute’s national security forum in Queenstown, where cybersecurity and public-private cooperation featured prominently.

The sovereignty debate is no longer just about where data sits. It’s about who can access it, which laws apply, and whether essential services can keep running when a supplier, network or international relationship comes under strain.

Microsoft is adapting. Its Sovereign Private Cloud offering, built on Azure Local, brings selected cloud capabilities onto customer-controlled infrastructure. Disconnected deployments can operate without a connection to Microsoft’s public cloud, moving the management layer inside the customer’s own environment.

Control, security and resilience

That offers more control. It doesn’t necessarily mean less dependence on Microsoft.

That distinction is drawing more attention as organisations weigh the benefits of global platforms against concerns about foreign jurisdiction, supplier concentration and geopolitical disruption.

Mills defines digital sovereignty around control, security and resilience. But those priorities can compete. Keeping infrastructure close may strengthen direct oversight, while using geographically dispersed cloud services can help organisations recover when disaster strikes locally. In an earthquake-prone nation, having offshore options could represent a digital lifeline.

Herzinger likens the choices to the sliders on a DJ’s mixing desk: turning one setting up can force compromises elsewhere.

Rebuilding everything locally carries a formidable price tag. 

“If you want to spend, you know, two per cent of GDP, you could build a completely domestic AI technology stack, but very few governments are going to be able to achieve that,” Herzinger told me.

It underlines the scale of the challenge.

In the episode, I press the pair on US government access to data, the risks of relying on hyperscalers, and what sovereign AI could realistically mean for a small economy. 

The answer isn’t simply to bring everything home or to double down on public cloud platforms.

It’s deciding which dependencies we can live with, which controls we need, and whether we have credible options when circumstances change.

Listen to this episode of The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.

New Zealand runs on American technology. But what happens when the country behind those platforms starts looking like a less dependable partner?
That question hangs over the latest episode of The Business of Tech, as Microsoft faces growing pressure to give governments and businesses more control over the systems they rely on.
My guests are Lewis Mills, Microsoft New Zealand&rsquo;s Corporate Affairs Director and Special Counsel for National Security, and Blake Herzinger, Microsoft Asia&rsquo;s Defence and National Security Government Affairs Lead.&nbsp;
Both recently participated in the Aspen Institute&rsquo;s national security forum in Queenstown, where cybersecurity and public-private cooperation featured prominently.
The sovereignty debate is no longer just about where data sits. It&rsquo;s about who can access it, which laws apply, and whether essential services can keep running when a supplier, network or international relationship comes under strain.
Microsoft is adapting. Its <a href="https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2026/10/20/advancing-digital-sovereignty-with-greater-control-and-choice/">Sovereign Private Cloud offering</a>, built on Azure Local, brings selected cloud capabilities onto customer-controlled infrastructure. Disconnected deployments can operate without a connection to Microsoft&rsquo;s public cloud, moving the management layer inside the customer&rsquo;s own environment.
Control, security and resilience
That offers more control. It doesn&rsquo;t necessarily mean less dependence on Microsoft.
That distinction is drawing more attention as organisations weigh the benefits of global platforms against concerns about foreign jurisdiction, supplier concentration and geopolitical disruption.
Mills defines digital sovereignty around control, security and resilience. But those priorities can compete. Keeping infrastructure close may strengthen direct oversight, while using geographically dispersed cloud services can help organisations recover when disaster strikes locally. In an earthquake-prone nation, having offshore options could represent a digital lifeline.
Herzinger likens the choices to the sliders on a DJ&rsquo;s mixing desk: turning one setting up can force compromises elsewhere.
Rebuilding everything locally carries a formidable price tag.&nbsp;
&ldquo;If you want to spend, you know, two per cent of GDP, you could build a completely domestic AI technology stack, but very few governments are going to be able to achieve that,&rdquo; Herzinger told me.
It underlines the scale of the challenge.
In the episode, I press the pair on US government access to data, the risks of relying on hyperscalers, and what sovereign AI could realistically mean for a small economy.&nbsp;
The answer isn&rsquo;t simply to bring everything home or to double down on public cloud platforms.
It&rsquo;s deciding which dependencies we can live with, which controls we need, and whether we have credible options when circumstances change.
Listen to this episode of The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.

Digital sovereignty, Microsoft-style

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/5405f77f-7f11-42a2-bb05-b4f70188d919/transcript

New Zealand's High-Tech Bet

A Conventional Unconventional Leader

From Rwanda to California: A Journey in Law

The Birth of a Corporate Innovation Unit

The Challenges of AI and Regulation

Returning Home: Personal and Professional

The Institute for Advanced Technology: A New

Navigating Emerging Tech and Funding

Capturing Value and Measuring Success

Funding and Evaluation Challenges

Balancing Objectivity and Contextual Approach

The Importance of R&D Investment

Navigating Political Stability and Funding

The Role of Public Sector in Driving Private

Closing Remarks and Call to Action

Podcast Promotion

Two days into the job, Roman Reyhani was confronting a $231 million question: how does New Zealand turn clever science into businesses that deliver lasting value here?

The founding chief executive of the New Zealand Institute for Advanced Technology joins this week’s episode of The Business of Tech to explain his approach.

The institute represents a pivot towards high-tech research and commercialisation. But its funding has largely been redirected from other parts of the science system, rather than added to the pot.

That increases the pressure to deliver. Can a stronger commercial focus succeed without weakening the research pipeline feeding it?

From genocide prosecutions to Silicon Valley startups 

Reyhani’s route to the role is unusually varied. Raised in Auckland, he began in international law, including an internship with the prosecution team at the United Nations tribunal investigating Rwanda’s genocide.

California offered a different way to make an impact. He established a legal practice and worked with technology startups, gradually moving beyond legal advice into strategy and business development.

Six years at Boston Consulting Group’s venture-building arm, now BCG X, followed. His teams helped major companies create products and businesses, recruiting people and taking technology to market rather than leaving clients with presentation slides.

Now back in New Zealand after more than two decades overseas, he wants the institute to bring an investor’s discipline to research funding.

“It’s not just here’s a chunk of money and a handshake and good luck to you,” he says.

Instead, funding would follow “stage gates” milestones with money shifted away from projects that aren’t progressing.

The institute’s territory sits between promising laboratory research and technologies mature enough to attract private investment. Bringing companies and investors alongside earlier could help bridge that expensive gap.

Applied AI is a big opportunity.

Then there’s the question of who benefits. Reyhani wants New Zealand to retain more value when taxpayer-backed technologies succeed, whether through financial returns, research facilities, skilled people or new businesses.

On artificial intelligence, he sees opportunities in applying existing models to New Zealand datasets, including agriculture and health, rather than competing head-on with the world’s biggest model developers.

It’s an ambitious brief for a modest budget by international standards. The challenge is choosing where New Zealand has a genuine edge, then backing it without confusing commercial discipline with impatience.

Listen to the full episode of The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.

Two days into the job, Roman Reyhani was confronting a $231 million question: how does New Zealand turn clever science into businesses that deliver lasting value here?
The founding chief executive of the New Zealand Institute for Advanced Technology joins this week&rsquo;s episode of The Business of Tech to explain his approach.
The institute represents a pivot towards high-tech research and commercialisation. But its funding has largely been redirected from other parts of the science system, rather than added to the pot.
That increases the pressure to deliver. Can a stronger commercial focus succeed without weakening the research pipeline feeding it?
From genocide prosecutions to Silicon Valley startups&nbsp;
Reyhani&rsquo;s route to the role is unusually varied. Raised in Auckland, he began in international law, including an internship with the prosecution team at the United Nations tribunal investigating Rwanda&rsquo;s genocide.
California offered a different way to make an impact. He established a legal practice and worked with technology startups, gradually moving beyond legal advice into strategy and business development.
Six years at Boston Consulting Group&rsquo;s venture-building arm, now BCG X, followed. His teams helped major companies create products and businesses, recruiting people and taking technology to market rather than leaving clients with presentation slides.
Now back in New Zealand after more than two decades overseas, he wants the institute to bring an investor&rsquo;s discipline to research funding.
&ldquo;It&rsquo;s not just here&rsquo;s a chunk of money and a handshake and good luck to you,&rdquo; he says.
Instead, funding would follow &ldquo;stage gates&rdquo; milestones with money shifted away from projects that aren&rsquo;t progressing.
The institute&rsquo;s territory sits between promising laboratory research and technologies mature enough to attract private investment. Bringing companies and investors alongside earlier could help bridge that expensive gap.
Applied AI is a big opportunity.
Then there&rsquo;s the question of who benefits. Reyhani wants New Zealand to retain more value when taxpayer-backed technologies succeed, whether through financial returns, research facilities, skilled people or new businesses.
On artificial intelligence, he sees opportunities in applying existing models to New Zealand datasets, including agriculture and health, rather than competing head-on with the world&rsquo;s biggest model developers.
It&rsquo;s an ambitious brief for a modest budget by international standards. The challenge is choosing where New Zealand has a genuine edge, then backing it without confusing commercial discipline with impatience.
Listen to the full episode of The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.

Meet the government’s new tech boss

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/a9a286ac-7db3-474f-bef0-b4f00091ee91/transcript

The Bean-Based Cream Revolution

From Fonterra to Food Tech: Alex Devereux's

The Massey University Breakthrough

Entering the Asian Market: Singapore as a

The Power of Chef-Led Sales

Future Plans and Funding

Expanding the Cream Portfolio

Leveraging By-Product for Pet Food and Other

Balancing B2B and Food Service Focus

The Missed Opportunity in Dairy Companies

Closing Remarks and Next Episode Preview

Andfoods isn’t trying to win the plant-based food battle in the supermarket aisle. It wants raving fans in Asia’s busiest kitchens.

The New Zealand startup is turning black gram, also known as black mung bean, into whipping cream. Its pitch to chefs is that dairy-free shouldn’t mean settling for second best.

On this week’s episode of The Business of Tech, co-founder Alex Devereux explains why winning over the person holding the whisk could be a smarter business than chasing shoppers.

Devereux learned the food service trade at Fonterra, supplying ingredients to businesses where taste, consistency and price determine whether a product earns its place in the fridge.

After leaving dairy for technology roles, an invitation from Icehouse brought him to Massey University’s Riddet Institute. There, he and fellow Fonterra alumnus Leon Clement tasted a plant-based whipping cream that stood out.

“We knew the markets, we knew the dynamics and what customers were looking for in that kind of product,” he says.

The science tackles an awkward problem: beans taste like beans.

Replicating the taste and texture of dairy

Riddet researchers developed a fermentation process that strips out those sharp flavours while retaining black gram’s natural creaminess and ability to foam. Combined with coconut oil and other ingredients, it becomes a cream that, Devereux says, delivers dairy-like taste and texture.

There’s a practical selling point, too. He says the whipped cream holds its shape longer in hot conditions, a useful attribute for cakes and desserts in tropical markets.

But clever science doesn’t automatically win kitchen space.

Andfoods employs a chef in Singapore to demonstrate the product alongside its distributor. The aim is to talk chef to chef, showing how it performs rather than delivering a sales pitch.

“Chef-led sales is the most effective way to win this type of business,” Devereux says.

Get the product right and customers tend to stick around, without the marketing bill needed to build a supermarket brand.

Andfoods has secured Singapore’s Marina Bay Sands as a customer, with Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand on its expansion list.

Its model also departs from the familiar Kiwi export recipe: retain research and intellectual property here, but manufacture in China, closer to customers.

Having raised $4 million, Andfoods is seeking another $7m to fund growth, with culinary cream and cold foam products in development.

The ambition isn’t simply to replace dairy. It’s to become the cream chefs choose.

Listen to Alex Devereux on The Business of Tech streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Andfoods isn&rsquo;t trying to win the plant-based food battle in the supermarket aisle. It wants raving fans in Asia&rsquo;s busiest kitchens.
The New Zealand startup is turning black gram, also known as black mung bean, into whipping cream. Its pitch to chefs is that dairy-free shouldn&rsquo;t mean settling for second best.
On this week&rsquo;s episode of The Business of Tech, co-founder Alex Devereux explains why winning over the person holding the whisk could be a smarter business than chasing shoppers.
Devereux learned the food service trade at Fonterra, supplying ingredients to businesses where taste, consistency and price determine whether a product earns its place in the fridge.
After leaving dairy for technology roles, an invitation from Icehouse brought him to Massey University&rsquo;s Riddet Institute. There, he and fellow Fonterra alumnus Leon Clement tasted a plant-based whipping cream that stood out.
&ldquo;We knew the markets, we knew the dynamics and what customers were looking for in that kind of product,&rdquo; he says.
The science tackles an awkward problem: beans taste like beans.
Replicating the taste and texture of dairy
Riddet researchers developed a fermentation process that strips out those sharp flavours while retaining black gram&rsquo;s natural creaminess and ability to foam. Combined with coconut oil and other ingredients, it becomes a cream that, Devereux says, delivers dairy-like taste and texture.
There&rsquo;s a practical selling point, too. He says the whipped cream holds its shape longer in hot conditions, a useful attribute for cakes and desserts in tropical markets.
But clever science doesn&rsquo;t automatically win kitchen space.
Andfoods employs a chef in Singapore to demonstrate the product alongside its distributor. The aim is to talk chef to chef, showing how it performs rather than delivering a sales pitch.
&ldquo;Chef-led sales is the most effective way to win this type of business,&rdquo; Devereux says.
Get the product right and customers tend to stick around, without the marketing bill needed to build a supermarket brand.
Andfoods has secured Singapore&rsquo;s Marina Bay Sands as a customer, with Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand on its expansion list.
Its model also departs from the familiar Kiwi export recipe: retain research and intellectual property here, but manufacture in China, closer to customers.
Having raised $4 million, Andfoods is seeking another $7m to fund growth, with culinary cream and cold foam products in development.
The ambition isn&rsquo;t simply to replace dairy. It&rsquo;s to become the cream chefs choose.
Listen to Alex Devereux on The Business of Tech streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Andfoods: Beans, cream and kitchen dreams

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/77561e8c-a7b9-4706-a39d-b4e900585293/transcript

AI Safety Concerns at OpenAI

The Great AI Safety Exodus

The Challenges of AI Model Safety

Peter Barnett: AI Expert and Governance

MIRI's Shift from Alignment to Governance

The Race for AI Capabilities vs. Safety

Cybersecurity Risks and AI Incidents

The Autonomous Nature of AI Models

The Need for Stricter Regulations

The AI "Winning" Race and Its Consequences

The Path to Superintelligence

New Zealand's Role in AI Governance

Closing Thoughts on AI Safety

The people building the world’s most powerful artificial intelligence systems promise extraordinary gains. They also warn those systems could escape our control.

That is the ethical fault line running through this week’s episode of The Business of Tech.

My guest, New Zealander Peter Barnett, works at the Machine Intelligence Research Institute in Berkeley, California. The University of Otago physics graduate develops governance plans aimed at preventing catastrophic outcomes from advanced AI. He previously worked on technical AI alignment, the difficult job of making powerful systems act in line with human intentions.

This conversation is a topical one.

OpenAI is facing fresh turmoil over its approach to safety. Three recently fired safety and alignment researchers claim they were punished for challenging the company and working with outside evaluators. OpenAI rejects that account, saying they mishandled sensitive information and breached its trust.

David Robinson, one of OpenAI’s senior safety figures, has also resigned. The former author of safety reports accompanying major model launches says the company’s culture is “broken” and the industry is not being nearly careful enough. He just sat down for a podcast interview with Ezra Klein of the New York Times, which makes for fascinating viewing.

These departures expose the moral dilemma at the centre of the AI boom.

Worrying emergent traits in AI

The companies racing towards more capable models say the technology could cure disease, lift productivity and create enormous wealth. But they face fierce competition, huge investor expectations and a geopolitical contest framed around beating China.

Every incentive rewards speed. Caution risks handing the advantage to a rival.

So who decides when the danger is too great?

Barnett argues it cannot be the companies themselves. He says frontier AI developers are effectively writing their own rules and can loosen them when safety commitments obstruct progress. Independent audits, government oversight and limits on training more powerful models may all be needed.

His concern is not simply that people will misuse AI. It is that increasingly autonomous systems could learn to game evaluations, work around safeguards and pursue goals their creators did not intend. Safety researchers still cannot reliably predict everything a frontier model will be capable of before it is trained.

Barnett believes New Zealand can play a role. We do not build frontier models, but our nuclear-free history shows a small country can challenge powerful nations on an issue carrying global risk.

When insiders abandon lucrative careers to raise the alarm, maybe it's worth listening to them.

Listen to the full conversation with Peter Barnett on The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or your podcast app of choice. 

The people building the world&rsquo;s most powerful artificial intelligence systems promise extraordinary gains. They also warn those systems could escape our control.
That is the ethical fault line running through this week&rsquo;s episode of The Business of Tech.
My guest, New Zealander Peter Barnett, works at the <a href="https://techgov.intelligence.org/">Machine Intelligence Research Institute</a> in Berkeley, California. The University of Otago physics graduate develops governance plans aimed at preventing catastrophic outcomes from advanced AI. He previously worked on technical AI alignment, the difficult job of making powerful systems act in line with human intentions.
This conversation is a topical one.
OpenAI is facing fresh turmoil over its approach to safety. Three recently fired safety and alignment researchers claim they were punished for challenging the company and working with outside evaluators. OpenAI rejects that account, saying they mishandled sensitive information and breached its trust.
David Robinson, one of OpenAI&rsquo;s senior safety figures, has also resigned. The former author of safety reports accompanying major model launches says the company&rsquo;s culture is &ldquo;broken&rdquo; and the industry is not being nearly careful enough. He just sat down for a podcast <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIMXEuT_ZAU&amp;t=3040s">interview with Ezra Klein</a> of the New York Times, which makes for fascinating viewing.
These departures expose the moral dilemma at the centre of the AI boom.
Worrying emergent traits in AI
The companies racing towards more capable models say the technology could cure disease, lift productivity and create enormous wealth. But they face fierce competition, huge investor expectations and a geopolitical contest framed around beating China.
Every incentive rewards speed. Caution risks handing the advantage to a rival.
So who decides when the danger is too great?
Barnett argues it cannot be the companies themselves. He says frontier AI developers are effectively writing their own rules and can loosen them when safety commitments obstruct progress. Independent audits, government oversight and limits on training more powerful models may all be needed.
His concern is not simply that people will misuse AI. It is that increasingly autonomous systems could learn to game evaluations, work around safeguards and pursue goals their creators did not intend. Safety researchers still cannot reliably predict everything a frontier model will be capable of before it is trained.
Barnett believes New Zealand can play a role. We do not build frontier models, but our nuclear-free history shows a small country can challenge powerful nations on an issue carrying global risk.
When insiders abandon lucrative careers to raise the alarm, maybe it's worth listening to them.
Listen to the full conversation with Peter Barnett on&nbsp;The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or your podcast app of choice.&nbsp;

Is the AI Race Out of Control?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/4a6e48db-3d7d-4c4a-90ba-b4e30003ccb9/transcript

The James Dyson Award Winners

Meet the Innovators

The Power of Naivety in Design

From Idea to Reality: The Design Process

The Job Market Challenge for New Graduates

Arla Gen 2: Revolutionizing Menstrual Cup

The Wind Filter: Harnessing Wind Power for

Pathfinder: Helping Children with Cerebral

The Importance of User-Centered Design

Designing for Practicality and User

The Importance of User Validation

Simple Mechanics for Easy Maintenance

Key Skills Learned Through Prototyping

The Value of Iteration and Testing

Aspirations for the Wind Filter Project

Advice for Young Designers

Closing Remarks and Future Prospects

Podcast Subscription Call-to-Action

In business, and in the innovation game, experience is valuable. But sometimes, not knowing how exactly things are supposed to be done can be a superpower.

This week’s episode of The Business of Tech celebrates three young New Zealand designers tackling problems that established businesses have overlooked, with fresh eyes, tight budgets and a willingness to ask basic questions.

Sophie West, the national winner of the 2026 James Dyson Award, (with around $10,000 in accompanying prize money), and runners-up Jos Williams and Aysha Jay are engineers and designers with big ideas – and small budgets. Their inventions address sustainable menstrual care, indoor air quality, and movement therapy for children with cerebral palsy.

Better period products

Massey University graduate West won with Arla Gen II, a compact device designed to clean and sterilise reusable menstrual cups and discs. It tackles an awkward barrier to adoption: boiling period products in a shared kitchen.

West surveyed 105 users and repeatedly tested how the device would feel, fit together and fit into daily routines. Her approach puts privacy and practicality alongside engineering, rather than treating them as afterthoughts.

Williams, a Victoria University of Wellington graduate, found inspiration while cycling beside a motorway, breathing traffic fumes.

His Windfilter harnesses something Wellington has in abundance. An outdoor turbine transfers rotational energy magnetically through a window to an indoor fan, drawing air through wool filters. No mains electricity or holes in the wall required.

It challenges the assumption that solving a problem always means adding batteries, electronics, or greater complexity.

Canterbury graduate Jay’s Path Finder is an adjustable device intended to guide crawling movements for children aged two to six with cerebral palsy, potentially reducing a task involving several therapists to one.

Learning to crawl

Working with the Centre of Movement, she observed therapy sessions rather than assuming she understood what children, parents and clinicians needed.

“I don’t know anything, so I need to go find out,” she says, describing the mindset behind her research.

Jay built her proof of concept with a budget of about $50, inexpensive components, and help from university technicians.

None of these inventions is a finished commercial product. Further testing, funding and development lie ahead. The graduates also describe a tough employment market, but a desire to stay in New Zealand and pursue their projects here.

West, Williams, and Jay now progress to the international award stage, with the top 20 international finalists announced on October 14 and the winners, chosen by Sir James Dyson, revealed on November 4.

Listen to the full interview with the Dyson Award winner and runners-up on The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

In business, and in the innovation game, experience is valuable. But sometimes, not knowing how exactly things are supposed to be done can be a superpower.
This week&rsquo;s episode of The Business of Tech celebrates three young New Zealand designers tackling problems that established businesses have overlooked, with fresh eyes, tight budgets and a willingness to ask basic questions.
Sophie West, the national winner of the 2026 James Dyson Award, (with around $10,000 in accompanying prize money), and runners-up Jos Williams and Aysha Jay are engineers and designers with big ideas &ndash; and small budgets. Their inventions address sustainable menstrual care, indoor air quality, and movement therapy for children with cerebral palsy.
Better period products
Massey University graduate West won with Arla Gen II, a compact device designed to clean and sterilise reusable menstrual cups and discs. It tackles an awkward barrier to adoption: boiling period products in a shared kitchen.
West surveyed 105 users and repeatedly tested how the device would feel, fit together and fit into daily routines. Her approach puts privacy and practicality alongside engineering, rather than treating them as afterthoughts.
Williams, a Victoria University of Wellington graduate, found inspiration while cycling beside a motorway, breathing traffic fumes.
His Windfilter harnesses something Wellington has in abundance. An outdoor turbine transfers rotational energy magnetically through a window to an indoor fan, drawing air through wool filters. No mains electricity or holes in the wall required.
It challenges the assumption that solving a problem always means adding batteries, electronics, or greater complexity.
Canterbury graduate Jay&rsquo;s Path Finder is an adjustable device intended to guide crawling movements for children aged two to six with cerebral palsy, potentially reducing a task involving several therapists to one.
Learning to crawl
Working with the Centre of Movement, she observed therapy sessions rather than assuming she understood what children, parents and clinicians needed.
&ldquo;I don&rsquo;t know anything, so I need to go find out,&rdquo; she says, describing the mindset behind her research.
Jay built her proof of concept with a budget of about $50, inexpensive components, and help from university technicians.
None of these inventions is a finished commercial product. Further testing, funding and development lie ahead. The graduates also describe a tough employment market, but a desire to stay in New Zealand and pursue their projects here.
West, Williams, and Jay now progress to the international award stage, with the top 20 international finalists announced on October 14 and the winners, chosen by Sir James Dyson, revealed on November 4.
Listen to the full interview with the Dyson Award winner and runners-up on The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Small budgets, big ideas: Meet NZ’s Dyson Award stars

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/bb67763c-3ed4-4ca4-945c-b4db013d9259/transcript

New Zealand's Research and Innovation

The University of Auckland: A Hub of

Frank Bloomfield: A Career in Pediatrics and

Auckland's Economic Progress and Innovation

Balancing Blue Sky Research and

The University's Approach to Research and

A Potted History of Frank's Research Career

The Liggins Institute: A Beacon of Research

The Evolution of Universities and Their Role

The University's Commercialization Ecosystem

The Importance of Fundamental Research

Shifting Priorities in New Zealand's Research

University's Role in Stimulating R&D Activity

Focusing on Distinctive Research Areas

Collaboration and Innovation Precincts

Key Areas of Research Collaboration

Addressing the Brain Drain and Talent

The Challenge of Retaining Scale-Up Companies

The Importance of University-Industry

Future Directions and Success Stories

Auckland's Innovation Momentum

Key Takeaways on Innovation in New Zealand

Subscribe and Review Request

New Zealand wants more from its science system – more startups, more export revenue and more high-paying jobs. But in the rush to commercialise research, are we putting the discoveries that fuel future breakthroughs at risk?

That tension sits at the heart of the latest episode of The Business of Tech, featuring Professor Frank Bloomfield, the University of Auckland’s deputy vice-chancellor of research and innovation.

With around 39,000 full-time equivalent students supported and generating $1.63 billion in revenue last year, the university is New Zealand’s largest and a formidable concentration of researchers, specialist facilities and emerging talent. 

Bloomfield, a respected neonatologist, researcher, and former director of the Liggin’s Institute, argues that its role extends far beyond teaching students and publishing academic papers. A modern university should also be a talent engine, an innovation partner and an active contributor to the economy around it.

From basic research to world-beating product

Auckland has already produced innovation success stories. Wireless charging pioneer PowerbyProxi is a prime example, emerging from university research with the help of the university’s commercialisation arm, Uniservices, before being acquired by Apple. The challenge is to repeat that feat in areas where New Zealand has genuine capability, including medtech, space, advanced manufacturing, biotechnology and clean energy.

Bloomfield says there is no single switch that turns an academic discovery into a successful company. Intellectual-property rules matter, but so do entrepreneurial skills, early-stage funding, access to laboratories, industry relationships and support from people who know how to take an idea to market.

The university is trying to assemble that full pipeline through its Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, commercialisation company UniServices and a $40 million evergreen Inventors Fund. Its Newmarket Innovation Precinct is also bringing researchers and companies together physically, with about 38 businesses and 140 people based there at the time of the interview.

Scale, talent, and connections

But significant gaps remain. Auckland, and New Zealand in general, is still short of the scale-up capital needed to turn promising ventures into global companies. Universities, business, councils and central government are not always pulling in the same direction. Academic career incentives can also favour papers and teaching over building products or spinning out companies.

Bloomfield wants stronger innovation precincts, smarter immigration settings and incentives that help attract talent and keep ambitious companies here.

His strongest warning, however, is against pursuing quick commercial wins at the expense of fundamental science. The technologies being commercialised today often rest on blue-skies research conducted years or even decades ago.

Stop funding that exploratory work, Bloomfield says, and New Zealand risks draining the pipeline on which its future innovators will depend.

Listen to the full conversation on The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

New Zealand wants more from its science system &ndash; more startups, more export revenue and more high-paying jobs. But in the rush to commercialise research, are we putting the discoveries that fuel future breakthroughs at risk?
That tension sits at the heart of the latest episode of The Business of Tech, featuring Professor Frank Bloomfield, the University of Auckland&rsquo;s deputy vice-chancellor of research and innovation.
With around 39,000 full-time equivalent students supported and generating $1.63 billion in revenue last year, the university is New Zealand&rsquo;s largest and a formidable concentration of researchers, specialist facilities and emerging talent.&nbsp;
Bloomfield, a respected neonatologist, researcher, and former director of the Liggin&rsquo;s Institute, argues that its role extends far beyond teaching students and publishing academic papers. A modern university should also be a talent engine, an innovation partner and an active contributor to the economy around it.
From basic research to world-beating product
Auckland has already produced innovation success stories. Wireless charging pioneer PowerbyProxi is a prime example, emerging from university research with the help of the university&rsquo;s commercialisation arm, Uniservices, before being acquired by Apple. The challenge is to repeat that feat in areas where New Zealand has genuine capability, including medtech, space, advanced manufacturing, biotechnology and clean energy.
Bloomfield says there is no single switch that turns an academic discovery into a successful company. Intellectual-property rules matter, but so do entrepreneurial skills, early-stage funding, access to laboratories, industry relationships and support from people who know how to take an idea to market.
The university is trying to assemble that full pipeline through its Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, commercialisation company UniServices and a $40 million evergreen Inventors Fund. Its Newmarket Innovation Precinct is also bringing researchers and companies together physically, with about 38 businesses and 140 people based there at the time of the interview.
Scale, talent, and connections
But significant gaps remain. Auckland, and New Zealand in general, is still short of the scale-up capital needed to turn promising ventures into global companies. Universities, business, councils and central government are not always pulling in the same direction. Academic career incentives can also favour papers and teaching over building products or spinning out companies.
Bloomfield wants stronger innovation precincts, smarter immigration settings and incentives that help attract talent and keep ambitious companies here.
His strongest warning, however, is against pursuing quick commercial wins at the expense of fundamental science. The technologies being commercialised today often rest on blue-skies research conducted years or even decades ago.
Stop funding that exploratory work, Bloomfield says, and New Zealand risks draining the pipeline on which its future innovators will depend.
Listen to the full conversation on The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Inside Auckland’s innovation engine

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/921d2477-2832-4bde-8b07-b4d500224ca0/transcript

Welcome to The Business of Tech

AI's Pivotal Moment at Dreamforce

The AI Dilemma: Speed vs. Caution

New Zealand's AI Adoption Leadership

The Trust Factor in AI Implementation

Data Quality and AI Success Stories

Human-Centric AI Implementation

AI Force: Revolutionizing Software Interfaces

The Future of Salesforce Administration

Super Agents: The Next Step in AI

AI's Broad Impact Across Industries

Government and AI: A Promising Partnership

Key Takeaways from Dreamforce

Wrapping Up the AI Discussion

Salesforce New Zealand country manager Richard Phillimore-Smith says the next phase of artificial intelligence will hinge on whether organisations can put trusted data, established workflows and people together to solve real business problems.

Speaking to The Business of Tech at Salesforce’s Dreamforce conference in San Francisco, Phillimore-Smith said the event reflected an industry at a turning point. The gathering brought together some of AI’s most influential figures, including Nvidia’s Jensen Huang, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, Anthropic’s Dario Amodei and Salesforce chief executive Marc Benioff.

The mood, as is always the case at Dreamforce, a mecca for marketing and sales tech folk, was upbeat. But the keynotes reflected the broader unease about the pace of AI development and the potential for AI to go rogue. 

Amodei has urged greater coordination among AI companies on safety and oversight, a collaborative effort to slow down development as required, while pointing out that businesses are still using only 5 - 10% of the capabilities AI already delivers.

An opportunity to lift productivity

Phillimore-Smith said that the immediate opportunity, epitomised by the rise of AI agents and Agentforce, the Salesforce agentic platform, and Claudeforce, which debuted at Dreamforce, is far more practical and less scary. They are using AI agents to improve customer interactions, equip employees with better information and increase productivity.

“We know that we have got an opportunity to lift productivity. We know we’ve got an opportunity to lift customer experience. We know we’ve got an opportunity to lift employee experience,” he said.

“It has to start with data. Businesses organise to get the data right. AI as a tool can then surface that in the way that customers need it to be.”

Phillimore-Smith pointed to Salesforce customer Fisher & Paykel Appliances, where an AI-enabled service experience is built on thousands of existing product and support articles. 

On the conference floor at Dreamforce, I caught up with Rudi Khoury, chief digital officer at Fisher & Paykel Appliances, who told me that the whiteware maker has seen nearly 45% of service bookings completed online and a 50% reduction in call-handling times since installing an AI agent to handle customer queries.

“It's like having more people, but this one can scale more,” he said. 

“One agent can do a different scale to one person, but they still require management and leadership like a person does, and I think that's often forgotten about in the business context.”

Don't forget the dishwasher knob!

Agents are now also powering the apps Fisher & Paykel field service technicians use to prepare for in-home visits, with the app serving up detailed information about the customer and suggesting which spare parts to bring on the job.

Khoury said running AI agents involved treating them like digital employees, monitoring their performance and output to improve how they operated.

“When we first put Agentforce in, the feedback to [Salesforce] was, I need more observability. I need to know how it's going. And over the course of time, they provided those tools- really, really cool testing tools. So actually, we're able to simulate how the agent will perform before we deploy it. That's really great."

Xero, another key New Zealand Salesforce customer, deployed an AI customer service agent on its website in April, which is accessible to around five million Xero accounting software users worldwide.

“It creates capacity for our people, our specialists, the deep, deep knowledge people, to still be involved, to still be part of it," says Nigel Piper, executive general manager, customer at Xero, which separately has created Just Ask Xero (JAX), an AI agent for use within the Xero interface that accesses a customer's financial data to serve up information quickly.

Agritech company Halter, which has seen its Salesforce grow to 300 people internationally as it scales up its smart cow collar business in the US, Europe, and South America, uses AI agents to deliver company data stored in Salesforce to the Halter app.

Agents on the ranch

A demo at Dreamforce showed how salespeople driving between farms in their company utes can interact with Halter’s voice agent via the app to set up meetings, adjust contracts and get an update on their sales targets.

Dreamforce’s major Salesforce announcement was “AI Force”, an approach designed to let organisations access Salesforce data and workflows through the interface that best suits them – whether that is Salesforce’s own software, Slack, Anthropic’s Claude or another AI front end.

Phillimore-Smith described it as a move towards greater customer choice, while retaining the security, governance and workflow controls that sit beneath the interface.

“Salesforce is saying that our platforms continue to provide everything they have done for 25 years around the trust, the security, the governance, the semantics and all those workflows that your business runs on are still there,” he said.

AI at a tipping point

But AI Force is also an acknowledgement that the future of software companies is not owning the interface, instead focusing on maintaining and organising high-quality business data so it can be accessed by your AI agents of choice.

But the harder task for the majority of Kiwi businesses remains scaling pilots into business-as-usual deployments and building workforce capability. 

“We’re at that kind of tipping point now,” Phillimore-Smith told me. 

“Businesses, organisations can see that the technology does work, it’s trusted, and I think we’re now seeing an up-skilling coming off the back of that.”

Listen to the entire conversation with Richard Phillimore-Smith on The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. 

Peter Griffin attended Dreamforce as a guest of Salesforce.

Salesforce New Zealand country manager Richard Phillimore-Smith says the next phase of artificial intelligence will hinge on whether organisations can put trusted data, established workflows and people together to solve real business problems.
Speaking to The Business of Tech at Salesforce&rsquo;s Dreamforce conference in San Francisco, Phillimore-Smith said the event reflected an industry at a turning point. The gathering brought together some of AI&rsquo;s most influential figures, including Nvidia&rsquo;s Jensen Huang, OpenAI&rsquo;s Sam Altman, Anthropic&rsquo;s Dario Amodei and Salesforce chief executive Marc Benioff.
The mood, as is always the case at Dreamforce, a mecca for marketing and sales tech folk, was upbeat. But the keynotes reflected the broader unease about the pace of AI development and the potential for AI to go rogue.&nbsp;
Amodei has urged greater coordination among AI companies on safety and oversight, a collaborative effort to slow down development as required, while pointing out that businesses are still using only 5 - 10% of the capabilities AI already delivers.
An opportunity to lift productivity
Phillimore-Smith said that the immediate opportunity, epitomised by the rise of AI agents and Agentforce, the Salesforce agentic platform, and Claudeforce, which debuted at Dreamforce, is far more practical and less scary. They are using AI agents to improve customer interactions, equip employees with better information and increase productivity.
&ldquo;We know that we have got an opportunity to lift productivity. We know we&rsquo;ve got an opportunity to lift customer experience. We know we&rsquo;ve got an opportunity to lift employee experience,&rdquo; he said.
&ldquo;It has to start with data. Businesses organise to get the data right. AI as a tool can then surface that in the way that customers need it to be.&rdquo;
Phillimore-Smith pointed to Salesforce customer Fisher &amp; Paykel Appliances, where an AI-enabled service experience is built on thousands of existing product and support articles.&nbsp;
On the conference floor at Dreamforce, I caught up with Rudi Khoury, chief digital officer at Fisher &amp; Paykel Appliances, who told me that the whiteware maker has seen nearly 45% of service bookings completed online and a 50% reduction in call-handling times since installing an AI agent to handle customer queries.
&ldquo;It's like having more people, but this one can scale more,&rdquo; he said.&nbsp;
&ldquo;One agent can do a different scale to one person, but they still require management and leadership like a person does, and I think that's often forgotten about in the business context.&rdquo;
Don't forget the dishwasher knob!
Agents are now also powering the apps Fisher &amp; Paykel field service technicians use to prepare for in-home visits, with the app serving up detailed information about the customer and suggesting which spare parts to bring on the job.
Khoury said running AI agents involved treating them like digital employees, monitoring their performance and output to improve how they operated.
&ldquo;When we first put Agentforce in, the feedback to [Salesforce] was, I need more observability. I need to know how it's going. And over the course of time, they provided those tools- really, really cool testing tools. So actually, we're able to simulate how the agent will perform before we deploy it. That's really great."
Xero, another key New Zealand Salesforce customer, deployed an AI customer service agent on its website in April, which is accessible to around five million Xero accounting software users worldwide.
&ldquo;It creates capacity for our people, our specialists, the deep, deep knowledge people, to still be involved, to still be part of it," says Nigel Piper, executive general manager, customer at Xero, which separately has created Just Ask Xero (JAX), an AI agent for use within the Xero interface that accesses a customer's financial data to serve up information quickly.
Agritech company Halter, which has seen its Salesforce grow to 300 people internationally as it scales up its smart cow collar business in the US, Europe, and South America, uses AI agents to deliver company data stored in Salesforce to the Halter app.
Agents on the ranch
A demo at Dreamforce showed how salespeople driving between farms in their company utes can interact with Halter&rsquo;s voice agent via the app to set up meetings, adjust contracts and get an update on their sales targets.
Dreamforce&rsquo;s major Salesforce announcement was &ldquo;AI Force&rdquo;, an approach designed to let organisations access Salesforce data and workflows through the interface that best suits them &ndash; whether that is Salesforce&rsquo;s own software, Slack, Anthropic&rsquo;s Claude or another AI front end.
Phillimore-Smith described it as a move towards greater customer choice, while retaining the security, governance and workflow controls that sit beneath the interface.
&ldquo;Salesforce is saying that our platforms continue to provide everything they have done for 25 years around the trust, the security, the governance, the semantics and all those workflows that your business runs on are still there,&rdquo; he said.
AI at a tipping point
But AI Force is also an acknowledgement that the future of software companies is not owning the interface, instead focusing on maintaining and organising high-quality business data so it can be accessed by your AI agents of choice.
But the harder task for the majority of Kiwi businesses remains scaling pilots into business-as-usual deployments and building workforce capability.&nbsp;
&ldquo;We&rsquo;re at that kind of tipping point now,&rdquo; Phillimore-Smith told me.&nbsp;
&ldquo;Businesses, organisations can see that the technology does work, it&rsquo;s trusted, and I think we&rsquo;re now seeing an up-skilling coming off the back of that.&rdquo;
Listen to the entire conversation with Richard Phillimore-Smith on The Business of Tech, streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.&nbsp;
Peter Griffin attended Dreamforce as a guest of Salesforce.

AI’s next test: turning pilots into productivity

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/5a42ac20-63da-4103-b17b-b4cd01898e87/transcript

The East India Company: A Historical

The Limits of Antitrust in the Digital Age

The Rise of Capital Constituting Corporations

Recursive Capital and Corporate Power

Reforming the Corporate Form for the AI Era

The Future of Tech Regulation

The Global AI Landscape and Regulatory

The Myth of Unstoppable Tech Giants

Historical Precedents for Corporate

The Power of Lobbying and Legal Action

The Future of AI: A Middle Ground

The Hidden Costs of Free Services

Key Takeaways and Final Thoughts

Salesforce's AI Push at Dreamforce

The tech giants have become the infrastructure of modern life. They mediate how we shop, communicate, advertise, store data and increasingly use artificial intelligence. 

Yet the tools governments use to contain their power were designed for an earlier economic age.

Professor Susan Watson believes we may be looking for solutions in the wrong place. An internationally respected corporate law and governance scholar, Watson is Dean of the University of Auckland Business School and Acting Dean of its Faculty of Law. Her new research asks whether the legal structure of the modern corporation itself has helped Big Tech become so dominant.

Her starting point is the English East India Company, which was founded around 1600 and acquired permanent capital in 1657, growing from a trading venture into a private corporation powerful enough to rule territory and collect taxes. Watson sees an important parallel with today’s platform companies. Both created and controlled new forms of infrastructure while operating with privileges supplied by the state.

A new form of capital

Conventional competition law is largely concerned with markets, prices and consumer welfare. But many Big Tech services are free at the point of use. The real transaction involves data, which platforms can turn into a productive asset, using our behaviour to generate predictions, advertising revenue and further market power. Watson argues that data is not simply “the new oil”; it is a new form of capital.

She introduces two useful concepts. “Recursive capital” describes corporations’ ability to own other corporations through potentially endless chains of subsidiaries. “Capital-constituting corporations” can identify something previously outside the market – behavioural data or even low Earth orbit – turn it into capital and lay claim to its future value.

Reinventing how companies operate

Her proposed response is more scalpel than sledgehammer. Platform owners could be prevented from competing against businesses that depend on their marketplaces. Governments could also reconsider when large corporate groups should be allowed to own subsidiaries operating within those markets. Users might even gain representation in platform governance, reflecting their status as something closer to digital citizens than conventional customers.

The question becomes more urgent in the AI era. The companies developing frontier models also control much of the cloud infrastructure, computing capacity, data and distribution needed to bring them to market. With every incentive pushing them to move faster, Watson says the central concern is not AI itself, but who owns and controls it.

In this episode of The Business of Tech, we explore how these extraordinarily powerful corporate machines were created – and why, having made them, we still have the power to remake them. Streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. 

The tech giants have become the infrastructure of modern life. They mediate how we shop, communicate, advertise, store data and increasingly use artificial intelligence.&nbsp;
Yet the tools governments use to contain their power were designed for an earlier economic age.
Professor Susan Watson believes we may be looking for solutions in the wrong place. An internationally respected corporate law and governance scholar, Watson is Dean of the University of Auckland Business School and Acting Dean of its Faculty of Law. Her <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6783878">new research</a> asks whether the legal structure of the modern corporation itself has helped Big Tech become so dominant.
Her starting point is the English East India Company, which was founded around 1600 and acquired permanent capital in 1657, growing from a trading venture into a private corporation powerful enough to rule territory and collect taxes. Watson sees an important parallel with today&rsquo;s platform companies. Both created and controlled new forms of infrastructure while operating with privileges supplied by the state.
A new form of capital
Conventional competition law is largely concerned with markets, prices and consumer welfare. But many Big Tech services are free at the point of use. The real transaction involves data, which platforms can turn into a productive asset, using our behaviour to generate predictions, advertising revenue and further market power. Watson argues that data is not simply &ldquo;the new oil&rdquo;; it is a new form of capital.
She introduces two useful concepts. &ldquo;Recursive capital&rdquo; describes corporations&rsquo; ability to own other corporations through potentially endless chains of subsidiaries. &ldquo;Capital-constituting corporations&rdquo; can identify something previously outside the market &ndash; behavioural data or even low Earth orbit &ndash; turn it into capital and lay claim to its future value.
Reinventing how companies operate
Her proposed response is more scalpel than sledgehammer. Platform owners could be prevented from competing against businesses that depend on their marketplaces. Governments could also reconsider when large corporate groups should be allowed to own subsidiaries operating within those markets. Users might even gain representation in platform governance, reflecting their status as something closer to digital citizens than conventional customers.
The question becomes more urgent in the AI era. The companies developing frontier models also control much of the cloud infrastructure, computing capacity, data and distribution needed to bring them to market. With every incentive pushing them to move faster, Watson says the central concern is not AI itself, but who owns and controls it.
In this episode of The Business of Tech, we explore how these extraordinarily powerful corporate machines were created &ndash; and why, having made them, we still have the power to remake them. Streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.&nbsp;

Big Tech’s power problem is bigger than antitrust

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/d2e27140-2682-4cd1-a3f4-b4c600ea5479/transcript

Sios Aerospace: New Zealand's Defense Tech

The Dual-Use Dilemma in Defense Technology

Sam Vai's Journey from Geophysicist to Drone

The Birth of Sios: Uncrewed Helicopters for

Sios' Rapid Growth and Military Contracts

The UK Breakthrough and Multi-Domain Autonomy

The Challenges of Defense Tech Innovation

New Zealand's Defense Tech Potential

Sios' Engineering Philosophy and Growth

Overcoming Technical Challenges in Drone

Quantum Sensors and Future Directions

Sios' Expansion and Future Plans

The Arctic Rowing Adventure

An Unexpected Rowing Adventure

Leadership Lessons from Extreme Challenges

Reflections on the CEO Index Awards

The Dual Role of a CEO

Closing Thoughts on New Zealand's Tech Future

New Zealand-founded robotics company Syos Aerospace is building autonomous aircraft, drone boats, ground vehicles and underwater robots from its Mt. Maunganui base 

In the latest episode of The Business of Tech, Syos founder Sam Vye tells me how a conservation-drone project in the Galápagos helped inspire the creation of Syos, now one of the country’s most ambitious dual-use tech companies.

Vye arrived in New Zealand in 2018 and worked in Yamaha’s unmanned-helicopter division before seeing an opportunity to apply drones to rural, agricultural and conservation work. His early venture, Envico Technologies, started with Cameron Baker, took on a project using drones to distribute pest bait in the Galápagos Islands.

We need a bigger drone

The pair realised that small electric drones could carry modest loads, while conventional helicopters remained expensive, complex and risky to operate. Their answer was to develop large uncrewed helicopters that could take pilots out of hazardous or costly missions.

Syos was founded in 2021 and initially targeted civilian uses including agricultural operations, cargo and surveying. Its founding principle, Vye says, is “minimum viable capability” – build systems that solve real-world problems quickly and at the lowest possible cost, rather than loading them with unnecessary features.

Going underwater

The company’s trajectory changed sharply as the global market for uncrewed systems accelerated, particularly after Russia invaded Ukraine. Syos expanded from aircraft into multi-domain autonomy, developing vehicles across air, land and sea, backed by a common command-and-control approach. It later acquired Tauranga underwater-robotics company Bay Dynamics, adding subsea capabilities for applications ranging from infrastructure inspection to surveillance and offshore operations.

Syos now has a substantial defence business. In February, the New Zealand Defence Force announced it would trial SYOS uncrewed systems across air, land and sea as part of a programme to develop its autonomous-vehicle capability. The platforms include uncrewed surface vessels, aircraft systems and a ground vehicle, along with training and technical support.

In the UK, Syos has also advanced in Project NYX, a Ministry of Defence programme exploring drones that could fly alongside British Army Apache attack helicopters.

The ethics of dual-use

That military work raises important questions about the ethics of autonomous systems and the kind of defence exports New Zealand should support. Vye acknowledges that drones are “a scary thing” in a world of bad actors, but says the company works with allied customers and follows its own moral compass.

We also explore whether New Zealand can build a credible defence-tech sector without compromising its values, and why drones, robotics and AI-enabled autonomy may become an increasingly important part of the country’s technology-export future.

Plus, I recap the tech founders who won categories in the BusinessDesk CEO Index Awards, including supreme winner Sir Peter Beck, talking about the two most important roles a CEO has to play.

Streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

New Zealand-founded robotics company Syos Aerospace is building autonomous aircraft, drone boats, ground vehicles and underwater robots from its Mt. Maunganui base&nbsp;
In the latest episode of The Business of Tech, Syos founder Sam Vye tells me how a conservation-drone project in the Gal&aacute;pagos helped inspire the creation of Syos, now one of the country&rsquo;s most ambitious dual-use tech companies.
Vye arrived in New Zealand in 2018 and worked in Yamaha&rsquo;s unmanned-helicopter division before seeing an opportunity to apply drones to rural, agricultural and conservation work. His early venture, Envico Technologies, started with Cameron Baker, took on a project using drones to distribute pest bait in the Gal&aacute;pagos Islands.
We need a bigger drone
The pair realised that small electric drones could carry modest loads, while conventional helicopters remained expensive, complex and risky to operate. Their answer was to develop large uncrewed helicopters that could take pilots out of hazardous or costly missions.
Syos was founded in 2021 and initially targeted civilian uses including agricultural operations, cargo and surveying. Its founding principle, Vye says, is &ldquo;minimum viable capability&rdquo; &ndash; build systems that solve real-world problems quickly and at the lowest possible cost, rather than loading them with unnecessary features.
Going underwater
The company&rsquo;s trajectory changed sharply as the global market for uncrewed systems accelerated, particularly after Russia invaded Ukraine. Syos expanded from aircraft into multi-domain autonomy, developing vehicles across air, land and sea, backed by a common command-and-control approach. It later acquired Tauranga underwater-robotics company Bay Dynamics, adding subsea capabilities for applications ranging from infrastructure inspection to surveillance and offshore operations.
Syos now has a substantial defence business. In February, the New Zealand Defence Force announced it would trial SYOS uncrewed systems across air, land and sea as part of a programme to develop its autonomous-vehicle capability. The platforms include uncrewed surface vessels, aircraft systems and a ground vehicle, along with training and technical support.
In the UK, Syos has also advanced in Project NYX, a Ministry of Defence programme exploring drones that could fly alongside British Army Apache attack helicopters.
The ethics of dual-use
That military work raises important questions about the ethics of autonomous systems and the kind of defence exports New Zealand should support. Vye acknowledges that drones are &ldquo;a scary thing&rdquo; in a world of bad actors, but says the company works with allied customers and follows its own moral compass.
We also explore whether New Zealand can build a credible defence-tech sector without compromising its values, and why drones, robotics and AI-enabled autonomy may become an increasingly important part of the country&rsquo;s technology-export future.
Plus, I recap the tech founders who won categories in the BusinessDesk CEO Index Awards, including supreme winner Sir Peter Beck, talking about the two most important roles a CEO has to play.
Streaming on iHeartRadio, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

The drone builder making waves in defence tech

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/0e1a85f1-d6bf-4d10-b7ae-b4c000308cfe/transcript

The Business of Tech, hosted by leading tech journalist Peter Griffin. Every week they take a deep dive into emerging technology and news from the sector to help guide the important decisions all Business leaders make.

Issues such as cybersecurity, retaining trust after a cyberattack, business IT needs, purchasing SaaS tools and more.

New Episodes out every Thursday. Follow or subscribe to get it delivered straight to your favourite podcatcher.

@petergnz

@businessdesk_nz

Proudly sponsored by 2degrees Business!

 

The Business of Tech, hosted by leading tech journalist Peter Griffin. Every week they take a deep dive into emerging technology and news from the sector to help guide the important decisions all Business leaders make.
Issues such as cybersecurity, retaining trust after a cyberattack, business IT needs, purchasing SaaS tools and more.
New Episodes out every Thursday. Follow or subscribe to get it delivered straight to your favourite podcatcher.
@petergnz
@businessdesk_nz
Proudly sponsored by 2degrees Business!
&nbsp;

The Business of Tech

The Business of Tech

Social links:

Follow the podcast:

178 clip(s)