Menu

intelligence

Businessman touching the brain working of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Automation, Predictive analytics, Customer service AI-powered chatbot, analyze customer data, business and technology

Anthropic launches Claude Opus 4.6 as AI market faces investor uncertainty

, , , , , , , , , 0

This article was originally published in Tech Announcer.

By Hugh Grant

If anything was to be gleaned from last week’s Super Bowl ads, it’s that the AI war has officially become mainstream. Only days after launching new products (on the very same day, no less), both Anthropic and OpenAI aired primetime spots during the most important advertising moment of the year — a reminder that this race is now measured in hours, not quarters.

As artificial intelligence continues to reach and reshape global markets, the gap between rapid innovation and investor unease is becoming increasingly apparent. That tension was on full display last week as Anthropic unveiled Claude Opus 4.6, its most advanced AI model to date, even as concerns over AI disruption, valuation risk, regulation, and economic volatility ripple through public markets.

Anthropic describes Opus 4.6 as its “most capable” model for business and knowledge work, emphasizing improvements in reasoning, reliability, and the ability to handle complex, multi-step tasks. The launch draws attention to a broader trend, as AI development continues to gain momentum even amid market volatility and investor uncertainty

Still, the market backdrop has become harder to ignore. Investors have increasingly questioned whether escalating AI infrastructure spending will translate into near-term earnings, especially as companies guide to higher capital expenditures for data centers and AI workloads. At the same time, regulatory compliance costs and liability questions are coming into sharper focus, particularly in the EU, where the AI Act introduces tiered obligations and significant potential fines for certain violations, adding another layer of uncertainty to how quickly and broadly frontier models will be deployed in high-stakes settings.

For Elliott Broidy, who leads Broidy Capital Holdings and invests in AI-driven capabilities tied to public safety and defense, the moment is indicative of a larger trend of rapid technological progress moving ahead, even as markets reassess the risks.

“Every major technological shift brings uncertainty to markets,” Broidy explains. “But uncertainty has not led to retreat. The technology continues to reshape fundamental work processes.”

According to Broidy, models like Claude Opus 4.6 represent a maturation of AI from experimental tools into enterprise-grade infrastructure.

“Businesses have moved beyond seeking novelty,” he says. “They demand dependable systems that can reason, synthesize information, and support real decision-making at scale.” Anthropic’s positioning of Opus 4.6 squarely toward business and knowledge work reflects the industry’s move from demos to deployment. The company has increasingly prioritized enterprise customers over consumer-facing applications to enterprises that rely on large volumes of data, complex analysis, and high-stakes judgment. These include industries such as finance, law, logistics, government, and national security.

“When an AI model can assist analysts, operators, and leaders in making faster, better-informed decisions, it becomes a strategic asset,” Broidy noted.

The launch also spotlights a growing divide between short-term market reactions and long-term technological developments. While investors worry about overvaluation, job displacement, and regulatory risk, companies and governments are steadily embedding AI deeper into their core operations.

“In national security and public safety, hesitation is not an option,” Broidy says. “Adversaries continue to adopt AI aggressively regardless of market sentiment, compelling the United States and its allies to maintain pace.”

Broidy points out that many of the most impactful AI deployments occur far from public view. Advanced language models are already being used to assist intelligence analysis, process vast streams of open-source information, generate operational reports, and support training simulations. In defense contexts, reliability and controllability are central concerns because official guidance stresses responsible and secure deployment.

“Instilling confidence is essential,” Broidy explains. “Whether it’s a defense analyst or a corporate executive, the user needs to be certain that the system is accurate, explainable, and aligned with human intent.”

The broader lesson of Anthropic’s launch is that AI fears and AI adoption can coexist, and often do. Market volatility may dominate headlines, but behind the scenes, organizations are making long-term bets on platforms that can deliver durable advantages.

“We are witnessing the industrialization of artificial intelligence,” Broidy says. “Models like Claude Opus 4.6 represent a shift toward embedding intelligence into the fabric of institutions.”

Looking ahead, Broidy believes the companies that succeed will be those that balance innovation with discipline. “Success will come to those building systems that businesses, governments, and societies can rely on when the stakes are high,” he says.

The launch of Claude Opus 4.6 signals this transition. AI’s role as foundational infrastructure is no longer theoretical. It is here, evolving rapidly, and reshaping how decisions are made, regardless of how rattled markets may feel at the moment.

Deepfake Detection, AI Facial Tracking Technology, Biometric Security System, Cybersecurity for Banking, Online Login Protection, Smart Surveillance, Fintech and Modern Computer Industry

The Role of Deepfakes in Undermining Election Security

, , , , , , , 0

This article originally appeared in Law News Day.

By Jordan French

Deepfakes dominate headlines, but election security threats increasingly reflect something bigger: the fusion of cyber operations with influence campaigns.

Since the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election, lawmakers and government agencies alike have publicly warned that foreign actors have manufactured election-related videos intended to undermine trust in U.S. elections and stoke division –  an approach that thrives on speed, amplification, and confusion.

That reality shifts the question from “is this video real?” to “how did this narrative get operationalized?” Three pressure points decide outcomes: account integrity, content provenance, and the speed of official response.

“People fixate on the deepfake,” said Elliott Broidy, chairman and CEO of Broidy Capital Holdings. Broidy, whose firm is increasingly focused on technology businesses in defense intelligence, homeland security, public safety, and law enforcement, including AI, argues that the real threat goes deeper. “But the deepfake is just the payload. The real attack is the trust pipeline. Compromise, impersonate, publish, amplify, and then dare institutions to catch up.”

Seen this way, elections face a trust supply chain attack. Adversaries target the systems that make information believable, including identity, distribution channels, and verification, rather than relying on a single convincing fake.

When an official or campaign account is hijacked, a false “polling place closed” post to social media does not need a high-fidelity deepfake to cause harm. It just needs the credibility of a trusted handle. Once a seemingly authoritative source shares it, even sloppy media can spark viral confusion.

Then the mechanics of spread take over. A screenshot outlives a takedown. Minor re-edits can help the same narrative slip past automated matching. Change the caption, crop the video, swap the voiceover, translate it, or re-upload with slight tweaks.

“If an official account gets popped, it doesn’t matter how good your detection tools are,” Broidy said. “You’ve handed the adversary your credibility. And credibility is the one thing you can’t rate-limit.”

That is why the defensive hierarchy is straightforward. Start with identity. Make provenance visible. Treat detection as the backstop. Upstream controls can outperform downstream moderation, but even strong account security does not solve the next problem, validating media quickly when the public is primed to distrust what it sees.

As generative tools improve, purely technical deepfake detection risks becoming an arms race. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has described ongoing work evaluating analytic systems against AI-generated deepfakes and the broader challenges of robustness, generalization, and content laundering.

If detection is about spotting deception, provenance is about making authenticity legible fast. One prominent example is the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity, which maintains an open technical standard intended to establish the origin and edit history of digital content through cryptographically signed Content Credentials.

But the last mile is fragile. A video that is downloaded, screen-recorded, or reposted across platforms may lose the metadata that shows where it came from. That can weaken provenance at the exact moment decisions get made.

“Provenance can’t be a niche feature buried in a menu,” Broidy said. “If platforms aren’t preserving authenticity signals end-to-end and surfacing them in the moment, then the public is still flying blind.”

Absent visibility, provenance cannot influence behavior during a crisis, especially for the people who most need it in the first hour. That includes reporters, election officials, campaigns, and community leaders deciding whether to amplify it, deny it, or correct it. People do not share what they have verified. They share what feels urgent and credible.

That is why rapid public communication remains a critical defensive line. In response, federal agencies have issued joint statements attributing fabricated election-related media to foreign influence actors and warning about continued efforts to undermine trust.

“In these incidents, speed beats elegance,” Broidy said. “You need a playbook. Lock the accounts, verify the source, and communicate fast in plain English. If you wait for perfect attribution, the narrative is already baked.”

The most common institutional failure is waiting to respond until everything is confirmed, creating an information vacuum that adversaries fill. The first hour is about stabilizing reality, not winning a debate. The longer uncertainty lingers, the more a single piece of manipulated media becomes evidence of a broader claim, that nothing is knowable.

The broader implication is that election interference has become a trust supply chain attack. Compromise the account, distort the content, amplify the message, and delay the response. The operation can succeed even if the falsehood is later exposed.

Preparing for future election cycles will require more than deepfake detectors. It will require stronger authentication, platform-resilient provenance, and rapid public communication systems that can compete with the time-to-viral clock.

A practical baseline can start small and scale:

  • Use phishing-resistant multifactor authentication for all campaign and election-office social and ad accounts
  • Limit admin access and monitor login alerts
  • Publish originals in one canonical place, retain creation files, and apply Content Credentials where supported
  • Maintain a public rumor-control page and a rapid statement protocol with pre-drafted templates

In the AI era, Elliott Broidy and other security leaders emphasize that election resilience will be measured less by perfect detection than by durable identity, visible authenticity, and rapid truth-telling.

Elliott Broidy ABC Money

Inside the Mind of an Investor: Elliott Broidy on Spotting the Next Big Opportunity

, , , , , , , 0

This interview was originally published in ABC Money on July 19, 2025:

Inside the Mind of an Investor: Elliott Broidy on Spotting the Next Big Opportunity

Elliott Broidy is an entrepreneur who has used his extensive experience and talent to found, invest in, and in some cases, manage as CEO, more than 160 companies over his four-decade career. Since 2014, he has focused on technology businesses (including, more recently, AI) in the defense intelligence, homeland security, public safety, and law enforcement sectors. He is the Chairman and CEO of Broidy Capital Holdings, LLC, founded in 2022 in Boca Raton, FL, and its predecessor, Broidy Capital Management, headquartered in Los Angeles from 1991 to 2022.

Q: Your investment career spans more than four decades. How has your approach to evaluating opportunities evolved over time?

Elliott Broidy: My evaluation process has evolved significantly over the years. When I first started, I was primarily focused on traditional metrics like market size and growth potential. Those elements still matter, of course, but experience has taught me to look more deeply at three critical factors.

First, I examine whether the technology meaningfully enhances human capabilities rather than trying to replace them entirely. Second, I assess how flexible the solution is—can it adapt to emerging threats and changing operational needs? And third, perhaps most importantly, I analyze whether the team understands both the technical and operational aspects of their solution.

I’ve found that the most successful investments come from teams that deeply understand the day-to-day realities of their end users, not just the technology they’re developing.

Q: Since 2014, you’ve focused primarily on technology businesses in defense, intelligence, and public safety. What drew you to these sectors specifically?

Elliott Broidy: The catalyst was 9/11. That event fundamentally changed my priorities, my interests, and where I felt I had to direct my businesses and attention. I felt a calling to dedicate all of my skills, resources, and energy toward the public safety, defense, and security industries.

I found myself profoundly motivated in those dark days to protect not only the United States but our allies. Since that time, that has been my professional focus. I believe these sectors represent not just business opportunities but areas where investment can make a meaningful difference in protecting lives and strengthening our communities.

Q: How do you balance innovation with practical implementation when evaluating security solutions?

Elliott Broidy: The truth is, the most innovative solution isn’t always the most effective one. I’ve learned that successful implementation often comes down to understanding the operational environment where the technology will be used.

I always tell my teams that a slightly less sophisticated solution that works seamlessly within existing systems is far more valuable than a cutting-edge technology that creates operational friction. It’s about finding the sweet spot between pushing technological boundaries and ensuring practical, day-to-day usability.

Q: What role do you see AI playing in investment opportunities, particularly in defense and public safety?

Elliott Broidy: AI’s potential in defense and public safety goes far beyond what most people imagine. The real power lies not in replacing human judgment, but in enhancing our ability to process and understand vast amounts of information in real time.

For instance, when analyzing large datasets, AI can quickly identify patterns and anomalies that would take human analysts weeks or months to discover. But the key is maintaining the right balance—AI should augment human expertise, not attempt to replace it. This means developing systems that provide actionable insights while leaving critical decision-making in human hands.

Q: How do you determine if a founding team has what it takes to succeed?

Elliott Broidy: I look for teams that combine technical innovators with people who have deep operational experience in the field. The most successful ventures I’ve seen have founders who understand both the technology and the real-world environment in which it will be deployed.

I also assess their resilience. Success doesn’t come without setbacks, for anybody, in any field. But it’s about the mindset with which you confront it. Do you let the setbacks define you, or do you perceive them as opportunities to grow and to thrive?

It’s also important to evaluate whether founders can delegate effectively. Highly ambitious and highly driven people often have difficulty doing this. They want to do it all. But you can’t, it’s simply not possible, and you will burn out if you try. Assembling a team that you can trust, and then delegating to that team, is essential for long-term success.

Q: Looking ahead, which emerging technologies or trends do you find most promising for investment?

Elliott Broidy: We’re entering an incredibly dynamic period in defense technology investment. The pace of technological change continues to accelerate, and we’re seeing new threats emerge that require innovative solutions.

Generative AI is moving fast—and it’s reshaping industries at every level. Quantum computing is transitioning from theory to real-world use cases. We’re on the edge of breakthroughs that could unlock processing power beyond anything we’ve seen.

But regardless of the specific technology, the key to success will be maintaining focus on real-world impact rather than just technological advancement. The most effective investments will be those that enhance existing capabilities while enabling new ones, always with an eye toward actual operational needs. The companies that succeed will be those that can adapt quickly to emerging threats while maintaining the reliability and integration capabilities that this sector demands.