I hope everyone had a good lunch or is busy finishing up an excellent lunch. With two Close Friends of mine. I am probably the only person who can say this in the entire world. I work with and for both of them. I want to make sure i disclose my conflict of interest to start with. General shanahan went to michigan. Rotc. E, entered service in 1984. Azillioneen promoted a g times. Eventually we needed someone to implement ai into the entire eod. He was the perfect choice. I have worked with him in my role as chairman of the eib. Kent walker was a federal prosecutor. Law and order, federal prosecutor who chose to come i think he worked at ebay for a while. We snagged him, we being google, 15 years ago . 15 years. Every day together. During that time not only did he set up the legal function, but is now in charge of all global policy, pr, although sorts of things together. Do, i thought we should since you have heard from me, is simply start and perhaps ke nt we should have some comments about how you see the world today. Thank you very much. It is a pleasure to be with all of you. Isvate Public Partnerships extort nearly important to me. I grew up in this community. My father was in the service for 24 years. I spent the first years of my life on military bases. My father ended his career at lockheed. I feel a profound commitment to get this right. To make sure they can Work Together in the best possible way. Before we jump into how we can accomplish that i wanted to take on two issues up front. It has been frustrating to hear concerns around our commitments to National Security. I wanted to set the record straight on two issues. First on china. Public aboutle was an attack on our infrastructure that originated in china. A sophisticated Cyber Security attack. We learned a lot from that experience. While the number of our Peer Companies have significant commercial operations in china, we have chosen to scope our operations there. Carefully. Andfocus is on advertising supporting an open source platform. Second, with regard to more general questions of National Security and our engagement in the making project, an area where it is right we decided to set off releasing them until we have our own ai principles, our own work with regard to internal standards and review processes. Our historyused on of working with the department of defense and the National Security administration. We continue to do that. We are committed to doing that. That work builds on a long tradition of work throughout the valley on National Security in general. Its important to remember the history of the valley in large measure builds on government technologies, from radar to the internet, gps, the sum of the work on Autonomous Vehicles and nts. Onal assista we had an extraordinary accompaniment with regard to quantum computing, which moved forward the frontiers of science and technology. That was not an achievement by google alone. It is built on research that was done at the university of california at santa barbara. It benefited from extensive consultation with Research Scientist at nasa. It was carried out in many ways on supercomputers from the department of energy. Those collaborations are really key to what has made americas Technological Innovations as successful as it has been. Just as we feel we are contriving to National Security communities, a lot of that work is a part of google. We have lots of vets who work at google. We go above and beyond to make sure they can complete military service will having thriving careers. We have tried to take steps to make sure transitioning to civilian life and they can make the best use of their military skills in the private sector. As we do we are fully engaged in a wide variety of work with many agencies. Nationalrking on initiatives. We are working on a number of fundamental projects to ensure the robustness of ai and to identify deepfakes. Hardware. Ion of as we take on those kinds of things, we are eager to do more. We are pursuing actively additional certifications that will allow us to more fully engage across a range of topic areas. We think this is extremely important. We think there is a Great Partnership to be had on the work announced in the last week. Done, it is a lengthy document, a thoughtful document. It continues the groundwork that was laid by the department of defense back in 2012. It talked about the use of human judgment in the application of advanced technologies. Sector, we have been trying to drive forward on this rate we have put out drive forward on this. Safety, human judgment, accountability, explain ability, fairness, all critical areas. Different actors in the space. Each have Different Things to contribute. This is a shared responsibility to get this right. We need a global framework, a global approach to these issues. Endorsing the framework around these issues is extremely important. Where working together to figure are a proud American Company and committed to the defense of the United States, our allies, the safety and security of the world. We are eager to continue this work. Kent. Nk you, general, take us through what you are up to. It is great to be here. Admittedly, im a poor substitute for the chairman of the jeep joint chiefs of staff. I also confess, this is undoubtably the first and last time i will serve as a warmup act for dr. Henry kissinger. Hang on for the main event. I not only welcome but relish the opportunity to have this broader conversation about publicprivate partnership. When you asked me to reflect back as a director of the there is one overarching theme that continues to resonate strongly with me. It is the importance and the necessity of strengthening bonds between government, industry, and academia. Academia and industry. You brought it up and others have mentioned the relationship it is a triangle the form as equilateral triangle. I would suggest that is largely the form it did take beginning in the 19 fifties lasting through the early part of the decade Walter Isaacson writes about this in his book the innovators. Thats what it is the go to for Silicon Valley today. They are distorted or a little frayed in addition to being different links Edward Snowden and agility and general mistrust within the government and industry. The task is made much more difficult the industry is moving so much faster when it comes to adoption and integration. And the Tech Industry he sees no sees no reason and even far more than it is portrayed we dont make it easy for them so i would reinforce the theme of the Security Commission report with the idea of a shared sense of responsibility and a shared vision of trust and transparency our National Security depends on even those for various reasons view dod was suspicion are reluctant to accept we are in a strategic competition with china i would hope you would agree it is a critical component of our nations prosperity and selfsufficiency. In other words where you stand with Ai Technology i submit we can never attain the vision outlined with industry and academia with equal partnership. Theres too much at stake to do otherwise. Publicprivate partnerships are the very essence of americas success as a nation across the entire United States government we have to make this triangle. I will ask a couple of questions to both of you talk about similar. [laughter] i think its no sick on dash secret and is quickly evolving becoming an Enterprise Company that there are different protocols and different ways of engagement to go along with that that all employees have ended have identical views on issues they dont but that debate and discussion is positive as well as a negative so with that constructive debate is America First on one of the leading thinkers of quantum mechanics. Out of that comes incredible strength that we can have a more robust framework to help build socials trust some as he put forward our principles and the governing process in a sense a couple of pages of those principles in the implementation because you could discover a lot of the hard problems conflict and are challenging we had debates whether or not to publish a paper on lipreading. Was a great benefit people are hard of hearing but it could be misused for surveillance and other purposes. Was appropriate to publish because that technology is only in the one one phase it is an example of those discussions of facial recognition or lipreading or other challenging questions we have to come to the reality of the tradeoff there is a lot of room for a collaboration of cybersecurity and logistics and transportation and healthcare that where we are already engaged with the military. So tell us more. Our intent was to go after commercial industry. Do not reinvent the wheel and our approach was simple anybody in the market there was a small start up with the cybercompanies in the world wide we have to google project maven cracks we want the best ai talent in the world with extraordinarily difficult problems to go after. To have that collaboration. What was happening internal and how that plays out is a different story that all the way to the end and there are products we were very pleased with. Now those Software Engineers that were ostracized for the department of defense but we have tremendous support. But what we found is we lost an area very quickly. And for them to be public about what they want to do in the department of defense and we do in very general terms it was intelligent surveillance and they had no weapons and it is my Weapons Project with those wild assumptions a project maven was or was not. No pun intended we actually googled it was actually controversial now has been put in permanently was not controversial to me or to the dean or not anybody right now beyond people that dont like what we are doing. This is an interesting point that im not sure everybody appreciates or agrees with me. I view it as a canary in the coal mine. As it emerged in the conflict we got some of that out of the way and how much the company and all the companies that we deal with want to work with department of defense. That is an important narrative. It would happen to somebody else at some point but the idea of transparency and what each side is trying to achieve is the biggest lessons of all. Its a tragedy we dont wear hats anymore with my big hat i can tell you with general shanahan with soldiers and airmen that we put them in front of the mindnumbing that they watch screens all day and its a terrible waste of the human asset that the military produces it is a huge opportunity to get them to work at a higher level. And indeed that creation. So now talking about ethics and that kerfuffle inside of google with the ethics proposal and that produced a Public Document which is quite definitive and maybe you could talk about that and then the proposal to the military and you are the customer on military ai ethics for go i assume both of you are in favor as they have copied your approach in favor of this. Does it really work. Does google turn off or stop doing things . How does it actually work . People claim the military wont operate under Ethics Principles and we cite many rules they are required to work under. Having frameworks in place early on with the review process is a critical part of internal as well as external so to talk about surveillance and recognition tools are deployed in appropriate ways and make sure we know the scope of project development. Thats a valuable thing for both sides to make sure expectations are clear across society. So another example is general purpose facial recognition that we have more policy and safeguards. And when it comes to weapons we went to be very careful of the application of ai. We recognize the limits of our experience in that area. And working through these areas there is a remarkable degree of convergence now internationally we see the European Commission and this is an interesting exercise we all have a combination for the next generation technology. This may be the best starting point with this area of convergence with commercial industry and the government with the ai ethics principal so do we agree on all of these or some of these . Its a good starting point. So i can tell you with certainty that china and russia to involve public hearings and discussion they are not doing and i dont expect they will that what they are doing and why they are doing it to embark on a long process with all the different voices of Artificial Intelligence. So by those who have time and attention 35 and a half years in uniform i have never spent that much time with the department of defense and eisai commended the. Looking at technologies and there are differences to Artificial Intelligence. It is similar to every other technology in the department and here is substantive differences for go thats a pretty good framework for go you have a way of looking at this with Artificial Intelligence our history and approach and training of how we bring it in with the prototype so now this report has been presented so what do you think about the report to have the best possible starting point and what will you do about it cracks this is where it becomes complicated. Is of the Implementation Plan to make these recommendations but through my boss to make those recommendation how we implement this this is not an overnight task. And to have that starting point. s to make thats wonderful framing i like to push back a little bit. Open ai into technology that was sufficiently good they did not release it but that is an example that is anybody putting pressure . They say no we apply with our good judgment. Famously you very early said we will avoid that where will the industry and up in the selfrestraint . Is a common set of principles . Is it common with being careful . How does this play out quick. You have already seen efforts on Artificial Intelligence with the work that is being done. Looking at more of these frameworks and appropriate safeguards with a variety of different areas. And we are on the path to doing it. That communication is background and how you use these tools so it is understandable but also that degree that is used. Talking inside the pentagon of this new kind of warfare. The take us through in the same sense what is new and powerful about this technology in a military context what is the language of the position quick. I go back to as we were formed with the secretary of defense walks in the room like yesterday. And says now you are the tea that will figure out and to get away from the Research Piece of it. But now we need a team that is focused on the war fighters. And what he gave us its not an accident. Becomes much easier to say. Your acronyms will kill me. [laughter] so its the idea of counterterrorism to be shocked by the speed and the chaos so how do we envision that fight happening. If you described earlier how fast we get inside these decisions quick. The author of i you get to the cycle of decisionmaking. But if we try to do this than the other side has machines and algorithms it is unacceptably high risk of losing the conflict. So what you are getting in the future scenario how will you be sure but that is a starting point and we have to do a lot more work on the front end but we will really be at a disadvantage if we think we are human against machine. It will be human and machine on one side and on the other but that superiority you may be facing it could be algorithmic. To me the key question is what happens it is human decisionmaking cracks so people check with their superior with a rule of engagement. How well the military adjust so we have to give people the policies of what they need to do to have a solution to develop the algorithm in the field we can do that. And its more than what people are comfortable with today. Talk about higher risk and higher consequence. It is the idea to decentralize experimentation and innovation that is as described this morning happens at the bottom you have to push from above. In addition cybersecurity and cyberdefense that we say to stabilize to Work Together to recognize those patterns. Do you have a model one of the themes of the whole industry but im really referring to the government as a whole do you have a model how the government should work quick. We only talk about two important elements and first is the notion and the second is a global framework which helps of that process it is the administrative question how to make it as easy as possible for a new company to enter into these partnerships. Its over small companies. And even to get more involved in that environment. So looking at modernizing procurement and then to make that as quick and as flexible as possible and traditionally that is Fertile Ground for these collaborative enterprises. Looking at Human Resources exchanges there are authorities out there that authorize private sector to come into the government but in practice its harder than you would think. Because we are making recommendations ending up in legislation one year from now are there specific things that could promote Public Private partnerships . Are those that were closely and that extraordinary contribution so the sum of all of that do you have a model of specific things that are helpful to decrease the friction and increase cohesion for the federal government. So much as started to happen the last couple of years castle run and compile the combat