Transcripts For CSPAN3 National Security Commission On Artif

Portion of the event they spoke with google Senior Vice President can walker and joined Lieutenant General shanahan. applause i hope everyone had a good lunch or finished a great launch, im joined with to Close Friends of mine and im probably the only person who can say this in the entire world, i work with and for both of them so i want to make sure i disclose my conflict of interest to start with, so general shanahan went to michigan, and entered the service of our country in 1984 he has been promoted again zillion times and in charge of whole bunch of operational activities and eventually we needed somebody operationally to implement ei in the entire d. O. D. And he was the Perfect Choice so i have worked with him in my role as chairman, can walk was a federal prosecutor law an order federal prosecutor who then chose to come to Silicon Valley, worked at ebay and then we snacked and maybe 15 years ago, every day together and during that time not only did he sell out our Legal Function but he is now in charge of all of the global policy, so very significant players, but i thought we should do since you all have heard from me plenty is simply start perhaps cant we should have you make some comments on the world as you see it today. Sure thank you very much, its a pleasure to be with you and with all of, you at the top of todays panel and private Public Partnerships is extremely 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 and military bases my father finished his career, and i felt a profound commitment to make sure that the defense secretary and University Settings can Work Together, before we talk about how we can accomplish that i want to take on to issues up front, its been frustrating to hear concerns around our commitment to National Security and events so i wanted to set the record straight on to issues, first on china, in 2010 they remember that google was dealing with an attack that originally happen in china with a sophisticated cybersecurity attack we learned a lot from that experience and while a number of our companies have significant commercial in ai operations in china we decided to scope our operation fare very carefully. Our focus is on advertising and working on an open source platform, second with regard to the more general question of National Security and our engagement and the project, it is an area where we decided to press the reset button until we had an opportunity to set up our own ai principles and own review process sees, that was a decision focused on indiscreet contracted out a broader statement about our willingness of working with the department of defense the National Security administration. We continue to do that, we are committed to doing that and that worked builds on a long tradition of work throughout the valley on National Security generally. Its important to remember that the history of the valley in large measure builds on Government Technology from radar to the internet to some of the work on Autonomous Vehicles and personal assistance that you are seeing now. Justin last couple of weeks have an extraordinary accomplishment which moved forward the frontier science and technology. That is built on Research Scientist at nasa. And carried out in many ways. So those kinds of exchanges that technological innovation. We feel its weird contributing to the National Community a lot of that work we have lots of people who work at google we make sure they complete their medical service and we try to take steps to make sure that is transitioning so they can make best use of military skills in the private sector and as we do that we are fully engaged in a wide variety working on National Initiatives to healthcare to Business Automation we are working on how to progress that operation of hardware and use that Hardware Software interface so taking on those things we are eager to do more to take on the certification with the range of these areas at the same time there is a Great Partnership to be had that were very well done and continues to lay the groundwork by the department of defense with the directive of 3009 with that application with the work that dod has done and we have been trying to drive forward with the principles in very common and overlapping areas safety, human judgment accountability fairness they are all critical areas there are Different Actors and that is critically important it is a shared responsibility to get it right with that global framework and global approach it is extremely important as something we want to support we are working together to look at the opportunities because we are proud American Company committed to the defense of the United States we are eager to continue this work and where we can Work Together. Where Different Actors in this space, each have Different Things to contribute, i think that is critically important, this is a shared responsibility to get this right and as the report notes we need a global framework and a global approach to these issues, endorsing the framework around these issues are extremely important and something we want to support and we are working together to figure out where is this, at the end of the day we are proud American Company we are committed to the United States and our allies, we are here to continue this work and where we can build on each others strengths. Well thank you, general take us through what youre up to. First of all let me say thanks, i thank you both that im a poor substitute although its a lower probability of in the headline grabbing sound bites, so i also confessed that this is ungodly the first last time that i will be set up for a has he kissinger but hang on for the main event, not only welcome but i always see opportunities to have this broader conversation about private Public Partnerships and when he asked me to reflect on main two years of director of the project in just about a year in the seat as the director theres one over arching theme that continues to resonate strongly with me its the importance i would state the necessity of strengthening the bonds between government industry and academia. This was said this, morning you brought it up and also had mentioned it, this idea that this should be depicted as a triangle and actually should be in the form of an equal lateral triangle. I would suggest that that is largely the form it did take beginning in the 19 fifties and largely lasting until the early part of this decade, he writes about this very eloquently in his book, it is what really drove to Silicon Valley today, its not the case today, at best they are no longer equal distance, you might even say they are distorted or a little frayed in addition to being different lengths. The reason is they are complex and multi, fold miss launch operations hopefuls, general mistrust between the government and industry, we started talking past each other instead of with each other. It has been made much more difficult that industries moving so much faster than the department of defense when it comes to the adoption and integration of ai, we are playing catchup, even knows they want to work with the d. O. D. That is far more than sometimes is portrayed, we dont make it easy for them, so i will just reinforce some of these things that are in the sub report and that is this idea of a shared sense of responsibility, a shared vision about trust and transparency, our National Security depends on it and even for those who for various reasons is still view this was suspicion are reluctant to expect that we are in a strategic competition with china and i would hope that they still agree with us that ai is a critical component of our nations prosperity and self sufficiency, so in other words no matter where you stand and respect to the future use of ai enabling technologies, i submit that we can never attain the outline and commission airport without industry and academia and equal partnership. Theres too much at stake to do otherwise, Public Private partnerships are the very essence of american success, not only in the department offense but across the entire government. So the message we have to make, we have to send this back to where used to be. Im going to ask a couple of questions to both of, you lets start with the both of you, talk about may even some more. I think its no secret that we are consumer company, we bring a lot of resources into that but there are different protocols and ways of engagement and as we go along to tell you that all of our employees have the same view on a lot of hard, issues but, it is a positive as well as a negative, you can talk about that constructive debate as the first innovation, you look at Great Research and scientists like richard sign man who was one of the leader thinkers in quantum mechanics. We think out of that comes get incredible strength and if we Work Together well we can actually have a more robust, more resilient framework, a framework that house built social trust as well as that works for the world, so as we put for a i and our governor process hes, an important to note is that the principles incense are easy, but the report of votes a couple of pages to the principles and along sections of the implementation because you quickly discover that a lot of the hard problems are what the principles conflicts in our challenging, we have had debates on whether or not to publish a paper on lip reading. Say that again . We have had debates about whether to published a paper on a lip reading, its a great benefit, people who are hard of hearing around the world, etc but could be missed used for surveillance and other purposes, after reviewing a particular technology we found that he was appropriate i want to one settings. But its examples of the issues we have with lip reading or facial recognition rather challenging questions where we have to come to terms with the reality, the tradeoffs that we are making, very much the case in a lot of these issues as well but within an awful lot of room for collaboration and cybersecurity and logistics, transportation, and Health Care Many topics we have been engaged with. General, same question, tell us more. So when we started this, eric told us this is where the, our approach is that everything that was in the market with 15 people to the biggest Internet Data cyber Cloud Companies in the world, one of those happen to be project why did we had to google this will we wanted to take the best ai talent and take it most broad ranges. It was a difficult thing to go after and we did this with the google team, what was happening with this company and how this played out in a different story but we got all the way to the contract and we got products that we were pleased with, i think for some of the Software Engineers they got to the point where you almost feel a little bit ostracize because others criticize them with the department of defense, daytoday working on the project team we had tremendous support for this. What we found, this is really the critique on both sides is that we lost the narrative very quickly, part of this was the company made a strategic decision not to be public about what they wanted to, do our approach was to talk about this as much as the company wanted to talk about, it in very general terms we dont want to get into operational this was on edge around and they had no weapons, on it was not a Weapons Project it is not a Weapons Project, we started hearing these wild stories and assumptions about what approach maybe was or was not, so the point was if you google today, the adjective controversial has now been inserted, it was not controversial to me or to the team i would say its not confidential to anyone tonight beyond people who dont like what we are doing so bringing this full circle this is an interesting point and im not sure everyone fully appreciates or agrees with me, i view what happens with this as a canary in a coal mine, the fact that it happened when it did as opposed to on the verge of a conflict or crisis we have gotten some of that out of the way, you heard ken talking about this as a really start, here with all that companies i deal with want to work with the defense, i think it is an important narrative i think it happened to somebody else but this idea of transparency and talk about what each side is trying to achieve maybe the biggest lessons of all that i took from it. Its a real tragedy that we dont wear hats anymore, i could borrow three hats, with this head on i could tell you that what i meant the general of the real problem is we take hes exquisitely trained people and we put them in front of mind numbing observational tasks they literally watch screens all day and its a terrible waste of a human assets that the military produces so theres a hard way to get them to do this so the procedure and indeed the center for ai which stood up and now head. So lets talk about another question and has to do with ethics, in the middle of the kerfuffle that went on, cant have the good ethics proposal and he drove inside an ethics process that produced this document, which i think is really quite definitive and i think maybe you could talk about that and then similarly it produced a proposal to the military and i believe there you are in the customer for what you wrote on military ai, i assume both of you are in favor and now they have copied variance of the approach in one form of another but what are the consequences of, this doesnt really work, does for example, does google turnoff things are stop doing things like in the last little while, i mean how does it actually work . Same question for you general there are people who claim that they wont operate under Ethic Principles and we cite the many rules of the military is required, maybe you can talk about that. So i think as they noted having frameworks early on but then also review process sees an escalation is a critical part of this. Its right, among our principles we talk about surveillance being concern a make sure that some of the recognition tools and the Image Software that we are employing is done in good ways, we dont want to pull away support and we make sure we know the scope of our projects that were developing and when we are licensing that have a direction for traveling there i think thats important for both sides and make sure of building not just half a Building Trust across society, another example would be a pei, you dont know uses will be made of them and until we have more technological safeguards were gonna be very cautious, another example is when it comes to weapons, this is an essential technology and we want to be very careful about the application of ai in this area so that is an area we are pursuing any recognize the limits of our experience, obviously military is going to be deeper and have more understanding of this and the like. We will work through different areas and i think there is a remarkable degree of convergence we see, now internationally we are trying to see the european conditions coming up with regulations for intelligence, this will be a very interesting exercise as we all pursue a Common Mission of how we build acceptance for this next generation. So looking at a from the d. O. D. Lands this may be the best starting point when you mention areas of convergence between the government and ai Ethic Principles are as good as drying this into the ground and dewy agree on all the some of these and if we dont its a good starting point. The other point is i need to state the obvious i can tell you with certainty that china and russia did not embark on this involving public hearings and discussion about the ethical and lawful use of intelligence, theyre not doing it and i dont think they will ever do it. So people may question what they are doing it and why they are doing, and i tell you what we just embarked on this long process to make sure that we take into account all of the different voices on the ethical use of Artificial Intelligence and i would say that the product has been delivered is an excellent product, shape by a lot of people who have spent time and attention against us. I have never spent, the department of defense actually has a long and commendable history of looking at the ethical use of technologies, there are differences with Artificial Intelligence and what this report does very well is what is similar to other technologies in the department, here are some things that are substantive differences, its a pretty good framework and we have a way of looking into this, our history, our processes and approach and in training are in place for looking into emerging these into a pilot in prototype, so now that this has been presented it is up to us, and one what do you think about the report and provides the best starting, point number two what youre gonna do about, it this is where it gets complicated, you need an Implementation Plan a department why an Senior Vice President<\/a> can walker and joined Lieutenant General<\/a> shanahan. applause i hope everyone had a good lunch or finished a great launch, im joined with to Close Friends<\/a> of mine and im probably the only person who can say this in the entire world, i work with and for both of them so i want to make sure i disclose my conflict of interest to start with, so general shanahan went to michigan, and entered the service of our country in 1984 he has been promoted again zillion times and in charge of whole bunch of operational activities and eventually we needed somebody operationally to implement ei in the entire d. O. D. And he was the Perfect Choice<\/a> so i have worked with him in my role as chairman, can walk was a federal prosecutor law an order federal prosecutor who then chose to come to Silicon Valley<\/a>, worked at ebay and then we snacked and maybe 15 years ago, every day together and during that time not only did he sell out our Legal Function<\/a> but he is now in charge of all of the global policy, so very significant players, but i thought we should do since you all have heard from me plenty is simply start perhaps cant we should have you make some comments on the world as you see it today. Sure thank you very much, its a pleasure to be with you and with all of, you at the top of todays panel and private Public Partnerships<\/a> is extremely 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 and military bases my father finished his career, and i felt a profound commitment to make sure that the defense secretary and University Settings<\/a> can Work Together<\/a>, before we talk about how we can accomplish that i want to take on to issues up front, its been frustrating to hear concerns around our commitment to National Security<\/a> and events so i wanted to set the record straight on to issues, first on china, in 2010 they remember that google was dealing with an attack that originally happen in china with a sophisticated cybersecurity attack we learned a lot from that experience and while a number of our companies have significant commercial in ai operations in china we decided to scope our operation fare very carefully. Our focus is on advertising and working on an open source platform, second with regard to the more general question of National Security<\/a> and our engagement and the project, it is an area where we decided to press the reset button until we had an opportunity to set up our own ai principles and own review process sees, that was a decision focused on indiscreet contracted out a broader statement about our willingness of working with the department of defense the National Security<\/a> administration. We continue to do that, we are committed to doing that and that worked builds on a long tradition of work throughout the valley on National Security<\/a> generally. Its important to remember that the history of the valley in large measure builds on Government Technology<\/a> from radar to the internet to some of the work on Autonomous Vehicles<\/a> and personal assistance that you are seeing now. Justin last couple of weeks have an extraordinary accomplishment which moved forward the frontier science and technology. That is built on Research Scientist<\/a> at nasa. And carried out in many ways. So those kinds of exchanges that technological innovation. We feel its weird contributing to the National Community<\/a> a lot of that work we have lots of people who work at google we make sure they complete their medical service and we try to take steps to make sure that is transitioning so they can make best use of military skills in the private sector and as we do that we are fully engaged in a wide variety working on National Initiatives<\/a> to healthcare to Business Automation<\/a> we are working on how to progress that operation of hardware and use that Hardware Software<\/a> interface so taking on those things we are eager to do more to take on the certification with the range of these areas at the same time there is a Great Partnership<\/a> to be had that were very well done and continues to lay the groundwork by the department of defense with the directive of 3009 with that application with the work that dod has done and we have been trying to drive forward with the principles in very common and overlapping areas safety, human judgment accountability fairness they are all critical areas there are Different Actors<\/a> and that is critically important it is a shared responsibility to get it right with that global framework and global approach it is extremely important as something we want to support we are working together to look at the opportunities because we are proud American Company<\/a> committed to the defense of the United States<\/a> we are eager to continue this work and where we can Work Together<\/a>. Where Different Actors<\/a> in this space, each have Different Things<\/a> to contribute, i think that is critically important, this is a shared responsibility to get this right and as the report notes we need a global framework and a global approach to these issues, endorsing the framework around these issues are extremely important and something we want to support and we are working together to figure out where is this, at the end of the day we are proud American Company<\/a> we are committed to the United States<\/a> and our allies, we are here to continue this work and where we can build on each others strengths. Well thank you, general take us through what youre up to. First of all let me say thanks, i thank you both that im a poor substitute although its a lower probability of in the headline grabbing sound bites, so i also confessed that this is ungodly the first last time that i will be set up for a has he kissinger but hang on for the main event, not only welcome but i always see opportunities to have this broader conversation about private Public Partnerships<\/a> and when he asked me to reflect on main two years of director of the project in just about a year in the seat as the director theres one over arching theme that continues to resonate strongly with me its the importance i would state the necessity of strengthening the bonds between government industry and academia. This was said this, morning you brought it up and also had mentioned it, this idea that this should be depicted as a triangle and actually should be in the form of an equal lateral triangle. I would suggest that that is largely the form it did take beginning in the 19 fifties and largely lasting until the early part of this decade, he writes about this very eloquently in his book, it is what really drove to Silicon Valley<\/a> today, its not the case today, at best they are no longer equal distance, you might even say they are distorted or a little frayed in addition to being different lengths. The reason is they are complex and multi, fold miss launch operations hopefuls, general mistrust between the government and industry, we started talking past each other instead of with each other. It has been made much more difficult that industries moving so much faster than the department of defense when it comes to the adoption and integration of ai, we are playing catchup, even knows they want to work with the d. O. D. That is far more than sometimes is portrayed, we dont make it easy for them, so i will just reinforce some of these things that are in the sub report and that is this idea of a shared sense of responsibility, a shared vision about trust and transparency, our National Security<\/a> depends on it and even for those who for various reasons is still view this was suspicion are reluctant to expect that we are in a strategic competition with china and i would hope that they still agree with us that ai is a critical component of our nations prosperity and self sufficiency, so in other words no matter where you stand and respect to the future use of ai enabling technologies, i submit that we can never attain the outline and commission airport without industry and academia and equal partnership. Theres too much at stake to do otherwise, Public Private<\/a> partnerships are the very essence of american success, not only in the department offense but across the entire government. So the message we have to make, we have to send this back to where used to be. Im going to ask a couple of questions to both of, you lets start with the both of you, talk about may even some more. I think its no secret that we are consumer company, we bring a lot of resources into that but there are different protocols and ways of engagement and as we go along to tell you that all of our employees have the same view on a lot of hard, issues but, it is a positive as well as a negative, you can talk about that constructive debate as the first innovation, you look at Great Research<\/a> and scientists like richard sign man who was one of the leader thinkers in quantum mechanics. We think out of that comes get incredible strength and if we Work Together<\/a> well we can actually have a more robust, more resilient framework, a framework that house built social trust as well as that works for the world, so as we put for a i and our governor process hes, an important to note is that the principles incense are easy, but the report of votes a couple of pages to the principles and along sections of the implementation because you quickly discover that a lot of the hard problems are what the principles conflicts in our challenging, we have had debates on whether or not to publish a paper on lip reading. Say that again . We have had debates about whether to published a paper on a lip reading, its a great benefit, people who are hard of hearing around the world, etc but could be missed used for surveillance and other purposes, after reviewing a particular technology we found that he was appropriate i want to one settings. But its examples of the issues we have with lip reading or facial recognition rather challenging questions where we have to come to terms with the reality, the tradeoffs that we are making, very much the case in a lot of these issues as well but within an awful lot of room for collaboration and cybersecurity and logistics, transportation, and Health Care Many<\/a> topics we have been engaged with. General, same question, tell us more. So when we started this, eric told us this is where the, our approach is that everything that was in the market with 15 people to the biggest Internet Data<\/a> cyber Cloud Companies<\/a> in the world, one of those happen to be project why did we had to google this will we wanted to take the best ai talent and take it most broad ranges. It was a difficult thing to go after and we did this with the google team, what was happening with this company and how this played out in a different story but we got all the way to the contract and we got products that we were pleased with, i think for some of the Software Engineers<\/a> they got to the point where you almost feel a little bit ostracize because others criticize them with the department of defense, daytoday working on the project team we had tremendous support for this. What we found, this is really the critique on both sides is that we lost the narrative very quickly, part of this was the company made a strategic decision not to be public about what they wanted to, do our approach was to talk about this as much as the company wanted to talk about, it in very general terms we dont want to get into operational this was on edge around and they had no weapons, on it was not a Weapons Project<\/a> it is not a Weapons Project<\/a>, we started hearing these wild stories and assumptions about what approach maybe was or was not, so the point was if you google today, the adjective controversial has now been inserted, it was not controversial to me or to the team i would say its not confidential to anyone tonight beyond people who dont like what we are doing so bringing this full circle this is an interesting point and im not sure everyone fully appreciates or agrees with me, i view what happens with this as a canary in a coal mine, the fact that it happened when it did as opposed to on the verge of a conflict or crisis we have gotten some of that out of the way, you heard ken talking about this as a really start, here with all that companies i deal with want to work with the defense, i think it is an important narrative i think it happened to somebody else but this idea of transparency and talk about what each side is trying to achieve maybe the biggest lessons of all that i took from it. Its a real tragedy that we dont wear hats anymore, i could borrow three hats, with this head on i could tell you that what i meant the general of the real problem is we take hes exquisitely trained people and we put them in front of mind numbing observational tasks they literally watch screens all day and its a terrible waste of a human assets that the military produces so theres a hard way to get them to do this so the procedure and indeed the center for ai which stood up and now head. So lets talk about another question and has to do with ethics, in the middle of the kerfuffle that went on, cant have the good ethics proposal and he drove inside an ethics process that produced this document, which i think is really quite definitive and i think maybe you could talk about that and then similarly it produced a proposal to the military and i believe there you are in the customer for what you wrote on military ai, i assume both of you are in favor and now they have copied variance of the approach in one form of another but what are the consequences of, this doesnt really work, does for example, does google turnoff things are stop doing things like in the last little while, i mean how does it actually work . Same question for you general there are people who claim that they wont operate under Ethic Principles<\/a> and we cite the many rules of the military is required, maybe you can talk about that. So i think as they noted having frameworks early on but then also review process sees an escalation is a critical part of this. Its right, among our principles we talk about surveillance being concern a make sure that some of the recognition tools and the Image Software<\/a> that we are employing is done in good ways, we dont want to pull away support and we make sure we know the scope of our projects that were developing and when we are licensing that have a direction for traveling there i think thats important for both sides and make sure of building not just half a Building Trust<\/a> across society, another example would be a pei, you dont know uses will be made of them and until we have more technological safeguards were gonna be very cautious, another example is when it comes to weapons, this is an essential technology and we want to be very careful about the application of ai in this area so that is an area we are pursuing any recognize the limits of our experience, obviously military is going to be deeper and have more understanding of this and the like. We will work through different areas and i think there is a remarkable degree of convergence we see, now internationally we are trying to see the european conditions coming up with regulations for intelligence, this will be a very interesting exercise as we all pursue a Common Mission<\/a> of how we build acceptance for this next generation. So looking at a from the d. O. D. Lands this may be the best starting point when you mention areas of convergence between the government and ai Ethic Principles<\/a> are as good as drying this into the ground and dewy agree on all the some of these and if we dont its a good starting point. The other point is i need to state the obvious i can tell you with certainty that china and russia did not embark on this involving public hearings and discussion about the ethical and lawful use of intelligence, theyre not doing it and i dont think they will ever do it. So people may question what they are doing it and why they are doing, and i tell you what we just embarked on this long process to make sure that we take into account all of the different voices on the ethical use of Artificial Intelligence<\/a> and i would say that the product has been delivered is an excellent product, shape by a lot of people who have spent time and attention against us. I have never spent, the department of defense actually has a long and commendable history of looking at the ethical use of technologies, there are differences with Artificial Intelligence<\/a> and what this report does very well is what is similar to other technologies in the department, here are some things that are substantive differences, its a pretty good framework and we have a way of looking into this, our history, our processes and approach and in training are in place for looking into emerging these into a pilot in prototype, so now that this has been presented it is up to us, and one what do you think about the report and provides the best starting, point number two what youre gonna do about, it this is where it gets complicated, you need an Implementation Plan<\/a> a department why an Implementation Plan<\/a> taking these recommendations and putting something together through my boss, and making some recommendations on how we implement this across the entire department, that is not an overnight task it will take us a while but we now have we have a outstanding starting point. That is a wonderful framing for where we are, i would like to push where this would go let me give you an example we opened a technology that would allow writing attacks a was sufficiently good that they became concerned and they didnt release it and said they only released it in southern researchers, that is an example and i asked them and they said anyone put pressure on you in the said no we just thought it was our good judgment you famously very early on this face recognition thing we are going to avoid that because of the dangers, where will the industry and up, will be a common sense of principles are they going to have an ai ethics common with being careful, how this play out . I think youre seeing some efforts with the exchanging of information, its going to be an evolving questions as we develop more frameworks about the appropriate limits of Artificial Intelligence<\/a>, and appropriate safeguards and checks and abouts is through a variety. I think we are hopeful with the Common Ground<\/a> work on the way we have started to lay this down, but this is true of any technology a communication platform, Television Radio<\/a> to the internet you needed to regulatory infrastructures. This is an extraordinarily powerful technology so its understandable that youre seeing a variety of views coming together but also notable that we have to do this. So you have talked inside the pentagon about this notion of a new kind of warfare and i think the term the you all uses algorithms warfare, take us through in the instance that can talked about this thing is new and powerful, whats new and powerful about this technology in a military context with your long experience, what is the language and positioning. I go back to as we were formed and then deputy secretary was in the room and i will never forget it was like yesterday telling us, you are now the team thats gonna figure out how you actually feel a i get away from the Research Part<\/a> of it which was all happening part of wonderfully behind the scenes. And the name that he gave us was the algorithm mick warfare cross functional team, its not accidental and its much easier to say but laughs your acronyms are granted tell me why dont you tell us what algorithm make warfare is . Were used to fighting for 20 years, counterterrorism, insurgencies, we are going to be shocks by the speed, of the, chaos the bloodiest and the friction of a future fight in which this will be playing out in micro seconds, how do we envision that happening, it has to be algorithm against algorithm as you described earlier as we were talking about it. How fast can we get inside someones decision cycles . The air force colonel that was the author of the observatory decide act, how do you get into the cycle of decisionmaking which was really never about the decider an actor who is more about the oriented things but in the future fight we are looking at this will be happening so fast if were trying to do this by humans against machines and the other side has the machines on the algorithms that we dont, we are at a high risk of losing that conflict. This is a challenging one because i think part of what youre getting at the future scenario, how are people going to be assured that our algorithms are go to work as intended. What we will fall back on and this is the starting point, is test evaluations and verification, we have to do a lot more work from the front and by the time we feel that we know it is being fielded. I think were really going to be at a disadvantage if we think we are going to be a pure human against machine, it will be human and machine on one side, human and machine on the others but the temporal dimension and the fleeting superiority where decision will be made that fast will be algorithm against algorithm. To me the key question is what happens when the whole scenarios fashioned on human decisionmaking. I understand the way the military works if there is a threat people check with their superior, theres a rule of engagement, theres human judgment its all built around some number of minutes not some number of nanoseconds. How will the military adjust its procedures to deal with this real possible threat . It wont be driven from above, but we have to do in situations like this is give people the policies and authorities and the framework to do what they need to do, the innovation and people say have associate to this im when i write a code im gonna develop an algorithm and applied to this in the field, you give me the data and tools and all those other things we can do that. So its in that fight it would be more decentralized and people are comfortable with today and that brings risk with it, so we are talking about a higher risk, consequences, but its either that or risk losing a fight, so its an idea of decentralized development, experimentation, and innovation and, the innovation as it is described this morning happens at the bottom and you have to give them the push from above to make it succeed in addition cybersecurity and cyberdefense that we say to stabilize to Work Together<\/a> 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<\/a> for these collaborative enterprises. Looking at Human Resources<\/a> 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<\/a> 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 we should say inside the dod has an impact to change the procedures that we have to figure out how to institutionalize with the department of defense and to bring in talent from the outside and then working for start up in the last job but also the chief technical officer comes in and within 24 hours a different view of what we need to do. We need sabbaticals people coming in from academia and secretary of defense that is all beginning to happen at the next level to understand what we are talking about. It is the are two peer relationships. We are priming the pump on the important areas whether models of simulation and recruiting different areas. Another important component is the kernel is critical that it is difficult for jeff to have security clearances for all elements of that piece so there is that successful individual experiment to build that familiarity to make it easier to have wider adoption. It is time to finish up i was to put to bed the notion Silicon Valley<\/a> would work with the military we have clearly see as we move forward to build this collective between private partnerships can use summarize the key message or the keyword . Why are you here and why did you make a special trip just to make this point we are committed to the cause of National Defense<\/a> United States<\/a> of america with safety and security we approach that task thoughtfully as we approach other technologies to be thoughtful with understanding as we move forward that the military and Us Government<\/a> share we are looking forward to work more closely together in the future. So you are the fellow that will make this change happen across 660 billion with an enormous bureaucracy. How will you pull this off quick. One person at a time. It has to be a culmination of topdown it was set on the Previous Panel<\/a> you must have the full support of leadership from the very top it is critical there is no question they already know what that is and how we meet that in the middle. This is a daunting task it is a multi generational problem with a multigenerational solution we wont wake up tomorrow to figure out right but just keep plowing ahead with the resources i know we will get there. I worked for 15 years back i could not be more proud of the impact on society and scale and reach of corporations and in general i dont think he can chosen a better person to lead this you really have moved the resources and gotten the money and the attention and delivered so thank you very much","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia803108.us.archive.org\/18\/items\/CSPAN3_20191119_002000_National_Security_Commission_on_Artificial_Intelligence_Conference_-_PART_1\/CSPAN3_20191119_002000_National_Security_Commission_on_Artificial_Intelligence_Conference_-_PART_1.thumbs\/CSPAN3_20191119_002000_National_Security_Commission_on_Artificial_Intelligence_Conference_-_PART_1_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240716T12:35:10+00:00"}