Kumar's reframing — from whether to slow AI down to how to advance while controlling it — captures the pragmatic consensus most industry leaders have quietly converged on. On our view, it's half right: absent global agreement, unilateral pauses are fantasy, and embedding controls into deployment (evals, audits, compute tracking) is the realistic path. But 'advance and control' risks becoming a fig leaf when the controller and the beneficiary are the same company. Worth noting that Cognizant sells AI transformation services, so 'responsible advancement' doubles as a commercial position. The missing piece in this framing is enforcement — controls without independent teeth are just press releases. Still, a Fortune 500 CEO making this case in TIME signals that governance-by-design is becoming mainstream boardroom doctrine.