Engineers Week 10th Edition! From AI to Quantum: AI, People, and Security

These themes are no longer isolated topics. AI capabilities continue to evolve rapidly, and challenge established ways of working, while raising questions about responsibility, validation, and sustainability. At the same time, security requirements are becoming more pervasive in everyday engineering decisions, particularly in large corporate environments where systems are interconnected and long‑lived.

What made this Engineering Week valuable was not only the focus on technology, but the way technical and non‑technical insights were combined. Sessions encouraged reflection on how engineering practices are changing, how people are affected by these changes, and how emerging technologies introduce new questions rather than immediate answers. This reflection captures the most prominent themes that surfaced throughout the week and why they matter in daily engineering work.

Development in the AI Era

The first keynote began by placing AI in a broader historical context, looking at how programming languages have evolved over time. The perspective was refreshing. Despite the impression that AI is fundamentally rewriting the rules, programming languages themselves rarely change through sudden disruption.

AI, rather than replacing these programming language foundations, is reinforcing them. Established languages persist because they are surrounded by mature tooling, shared knowledge, and operational trust. In that sense, AI tends to amplify existing practices instead of introducing entirely new ones.

A joke captured during this session simplified the message: “A machine‑learning algorithm walks into a bar and orders whatever everyone else is having.”

That distinction carried into more practical sessions. AI was consistently framed as an accelerator, not a replacement. At Rabobank, this distinction is reflected in how tools are positioned. GitHub Copilot supports developers at the code level, while Microsoft Copilot focuses on productivity across workflows and remains accessible for internal use. Across demos and examples, one principle stayed constant: responsibility remains with people .

AI can help debug faster, summarize logs, generate tests, automate small tasks, or assist with documentation, although verification is non‑negotiable. Convenience does not remove accountability.

This naturally led into discussions around sustainability. AI usage is not free, either financially or environmentally. Understanding where costs come from, which models are used, and how scale affects consumption becomes part of the engineering role. Small architectural decisions, such as indexing strategies in AI search or caching repeated LLM prompts, can significantly reduce token usage , lowering both operational cost and the environmental footprint of AI workloads over time. Efficiency, once again, becomes a design choice.

More Than Technology

Besides the session on platforms and technology, some of the most impactful discussions deliberately stepped away from technology. A consistent reminder throughout the week was that systems are built for people and by people. Drawing from my own experience working across different companies, environments, and cultures, this perspective becomes visible from both sides.

Accessibility was one of the strongest examples of this shift. Rather than being treated as a compliance topic, it was framed as a design responsibility. Users interact with systems under very different conditions, such as limited bandwidth, visual or auditory constraints, cognitive load, or differences in perception. Designing these realities in mind requires a deliberate change in perspective from ourselves to the user.

This people-first perspective extended inward as well. Sessions on personal resilience acknowledged how demanding the current pace of change can be. A stoic mindset was presented as a practical anchor, focusing on what we can control, our actions and choices, while accepting uncertainty as part of the environment.

A related discussion addressed impostor syndrome, a topic many people quietly experience. Understanding its different forms helps place self-doubt into context and recognize how it influences decisions, confidence, and collaboration. Awareness alone does not eliminate it, but it creates space for healthier responses.

Leadership was approached from a similarly grounded angle. The transition from engineer to leader was not framed as a promotion, but as a shift in focus from what we build to why we build it, and from delivery to impact. One message resonated strongly: connecting with people is becoming increasingly important, because tomorrow AI will write much of the code. Meaning, trust, and influence will still remain human.

Security and Quantum Cryptography

Security was never far from the conversation, and understandably so. The broader context of geopolitical tension has accelerated the need for stronger and more proactive security thinking.

During this Engineering Week, the Digital Shield community, of which I am also part, was presented as a step in that direction. The initiative aims to move from a top‑down enforcement model toward a bottom‑up security culture, where engineers actively participate in shaping secure systems.

One interesting fact on this occasion was that there were at least five sessions related to quantum technologies:

• Quantum Computing in 30 Minutes: From Qubits to Real World Impact
• Post‑Quantum Cryptography: Securing Tomorrow Today
• Post‑Quantum Crypto: A Practical Demonstration on How to Sign and Verify Data
• But What About Quantum?
• Quantum Cryptography, Qubit Developments and Pseudonymization

Within this space, quantum computing emerged as one of the most forward‑looking but also practical concerns. Quantum technology is no longer a distant possibility. It is progressing steadily, and with that progress come serious implications for cryptography.

Several sessions explored how quantum computing differs fundamentally from classical computing. In classical systems, bits are abstract, while in quantum computing, qubits are physical, noisy, and error‑prone. Topics such as quantum error correction, logical versus physical qubits, and even an initial look at low‑level quantum assembly languages illustrated how early, yet real, this field already is.

As quantum computing continues to mature, encryption methods we rely on today, such as elliptic curve cryptography, will eventually become breakable. This creates a real risk, especially in regulated environments, where data encrypted today can be stored and decrypted later once quantum machines become powerful enough. This “harvest now, decrypt later” scenario is particularly concerning for long‑lived and historical data.

What makes this challenge more complex is that it is not only about upgrading current systems to post‑quantum cryptography. There is also legacy data to consider, along with pseudonymized datasets, complex system landscapes, and the performance and interoperability impact of new cryptographic algorithms. Algorithms such as RSA, widely used across the industry, rely on mathematical assumptions that are not expected to hold against quantum‑capable systems. As a result, hybrid approaches, post‑quantum algorithms, and changes to PKI and certificate transparency are already being explored and, in some cases, implemented.

The focus on quantum‑related progress and discussion clearly emerged as a hot topic and something to stay close to. The main takeaway from these sessions was that preparation for post‑quantum cryptography already started. Quantum technologies are accelerating their maturation, supported in part by progress in AI. For banking and other highly regulated industries, post‑quantum cryptography is not a theoretical exercise, but an imminent risk management decision, and in these sectors also a legal and compliance requirement.

Final thoughts

Throughout my career, I have experienced different technological changes, each with its own pace and learning curve. Events like Engineering Week help engage people and share knowledge at a broader level, providing what is often called a helicopter view. Having visibility into the advancements and initiatives taking place across different parts of the organization to evaluate new technologies, and openly sharing experiences to strengthen a cohesive team, is highly valuable.

One of my main takeaways is that AI accelerates development but does not remove responsibility. At the same time, quantum computing, regardless of when reaches the level of maturity required to break current cryptographic mechanisms, is already a reality in progress. Preparing for post‑quantum cryptography is a requirement that will need to be addressed across the broader cryptography landscape.