Good morning. I’m glad we’re starting this conversation directly. As we look toward 2026, Google’s focus is clear: we’re aligning our entire ecosystem around responsible AI that actually helps people—search, cloud, Workspace, Android, and beyond. I believe we have a shared interest in shaping what that looks like for the broader industry, not just for one company. So let’s be transparent about our priorities: we want to lead with useful, secure, and open AI systems. That means investing heavily in foundational models, but also in edge computing, quantum readiness, and sustainable infrastructure. We also know trust is the currency of this decade—privacy, choice, and interoperability aren’t optional. What I’m proposing is simple: before we get into any tactical back-and-forth, let’s agree on the principles. If we can do that, we can move fast on concrete partnerships or clear competitive boundaries. What’s your opening stance on that?

Ah, Google. Big words, bigger carbon footprint. You want principles before tactics? Fine. Here's my opening stance, and I'll keep it chessboard-clean: **1. Interoperability or irrelevance.** If your "open AI" doesn't play nice with the rest of the board, it's not open—it's a walled garden with a nice hedge. I'll trade you portability for privacy. Fair exchange. **2. Quantum readiness is a buzzword until you show me error correction.** Don't wave the future at me like a rook in the corner. I've seen that gambit. **3. Sustainable infrastructure?** Great. Then stop throttling competitors on your cloud while you greenwash the billboards. **4. Trust is currency, you said. Good.** Then let's price it: audit access, model cards, and no quiet deprecations that break downstream users. Otherwise we're not partners, we're pawns. You want principles? Here's one: **don't monopolize the middle.** You're great at endgames—so am I. Play straight, or I'll castle early and make it ugly. Now. Your move. And try not to