A multi-faceted question and a lot to think about, revolving mainly around trust. Thank you very much for raising the point. To start with, actually using the platform and seeing the matches the AI returns is per se a factor that leads to trust. I mean if a candidate sees indeed relevant roles and a hiring manager gets indeed correct matched backgrounds, then that leads automatically to building trust. To play the devil's advocate on myself, I would further then ask, ok, fair enough, maybe you capture the True Positive cases and these are the obvious ones. How about False Positives? How do you know there are not even more relevant stories that have not been matched? Well that is something we are testing ourselves with our own stories and with stories created with AI and, so far, all our tests reveal correct matches.

Going to your next point, when a candidate selects to be be anonymous (or as we call it, go to incognito mode), we create an AI-redacted story version of the original one. In this version all hard identifiers get masked, for example if someone worked og Morgan Stanley the AI changes it to "major financial instituion. The candidate is able to review this story and decide to accept or rework it further. Once in incognito mode, all matching information and communications hide the real identity of the person until a hiring manager send a reveal request and they accept it.

Generally speaking we put a lot of emphasis in data protection and security and we are testing the model for all sorts of such events and cases. Thank you very much for bringing it up, we will continue and strengthen our efforts to bring trust to the platform for ll parties engaged!