tv Norwich University Military Writers Symposium CSPAN December 16, 2019 6:30am-8:01am EST
they see much more estate they follow the different framework. i think it is something we need to reflect very carefully going forward how do we adopt, reform and make sure that our legal law principles are both solid and grounded and help us fight the wars that we need to fight while staying true to our values. to me that be a key challenge of the future. and the question that you are really asking is what will be different that someone in that role of the staff officer and military mutts can be different from them when they are advising their boss on
what to do. i think there are two things that stand out. one is a play off of what paul brought up. ten years out. the task of that staff officer in the executive is not can it be go out and get me the information on acts rather it's going to be help me to figure out which of this information is important and which of it is actually true. we will move from a space where we have to find the data that's what a lot of people are in now to know that there is so much of it. what really matters. and then we move into ten years out. whether you are talking about a battlefield operation to
what to my customers think did this crime happened or not or who did it. the second challenge comes from opportunity is in a world with more artificial intelligence the decisions that will be made will be more and more guided by ai. and will be it will be the one sifting through all of that data and taking the decision itself or providing recommendations. we already see this and everything from which way should you go to get to the destination to it is used to advise who is eligible for a loan for their house mortgage or not to give you the military version of the wave map. they were testing one that was a military version of a route recommendation.
it did not tell you the route to go based off of time savings. you can see could see all of these different recommendations. who gets promoted or not. i know that's wrong. and i have to go right. this is same this person should not get along. or maybe there is an issue of outward bias. we are training our ai off of data from iraq and afghanistan which is great except is that actually going to create and
be suitable for a major conflict against china. those two elements and the idea of helping people sift through information what's real and not when do you you listen to the ai and when do you not. the good news is you are like bain from the batman movie you grew up in the dark. this is what you know.
to the paneling in 25 years these people will be our community leaders. our business owners in our military commanders. as a the context i now ask each of you. certainly we will have follow-up from the other two. you had championed human rights. like homeless refugees, noncombatant casualties. and resource deprivation. with rapidly changing technology what will
fought along similar lines. i think it is eroding some of the basic principles that we have fought so hard for us over the previous decades. over the use of chemical weapons. we should of thought we have pretty much established one of the key principles. receipt chemical weapons used in relative unity. with a great deal of urgency looking forward is to establish and reaffirm the key principles of humanitarian law. this would be harder to do as more and more we see a rise of a geopolitical opposition.
legal system after it has is being destroyed. the time is now. do you have any follow-up on that. i think one of the other interesting aspects is the new challenges that the institutions that protect human rights face. from new types of threats. as we take a play off of that example. the resistance to to trying to create accountability of it took place everywhere from within the united nations and the classic way but it also entailed a massive disinformation campaign pushed over social media and trying to reach into the different body politics.
or it was fake news. it was planted by the insurance itself. they were targeting the united states 2016 election. it's a means of information that made it harder to build respect. one of these interesting things is how do we build up resilience to those kind of attacks not just our politics but also we've seen human rights groups attack. the human rights group with suzanne. -- sudan.
doesn't sound familiar. to prevent it from operating effectively. from global respect to human rights. there is a long running contest of course we got to the end of the 20th century. they won the contest of the 20th century. that was not the end of the story. we are seeing new forms evolve and if you don't see it up for
these values certainly in syria the aggressive abuse of human rights in the inability for them to do anything about it detaining over a million of its citizens. there is plenty of information about it. china basically bought off other countries in europe is largely silent on this. their country is getting money from china. there is a view in the late
1990s overtime engagement would be to try to come in more liberal. or now facing a very serious competitor in china that has a very different view of the world. i think it's a real challenge to see how to adapt to this. they would love a right a spot where human rights doesn't matter. it contains characters who consistently express honor it perhaps eliminates it from the battlefield.
this morning they profess that empathy is what makes america's military so much better than everybody else. honor and empathy remain essentially in conflict. or is it going to be a liability or perhaps both. they blame the loss of or for the outcome that they didn't like. it was like fighting with one hand behind my back. after he let bin laden go blamed his lawyers for not allowing him there's a convoy that bin laden is in. he blamed his lawyer. on the son of a army officer.
anyone who knows the space it knows that they don't tell the four-star general what to do. honor is about following a code. it's about following a set of right and wrong. either normative rules or written down once. essentially there is two things to know here. we often blame that for outcomes that haven't nothing to do with it. history shows professional forces and is to find by those who operate by a code as opposed to barbarian forces which are warriors is a professional forces history shows professionals
consistently beat warriors. those that follow a code. the reason is because of what you see here. what you see in the code. it's a way in those that follow a coat can't. they can win hearts and mind interest of the local civilian force. whatever the technology that we are talking about. if you are using in a manner that is barbarian like it will create blowback upon you. that's one of the interesting things we had been wrestling with.
you could have all of the great unmanned systems you want. it's like in a deliver you the victory that you want because it ends up producing more people volunteering. people are not delivering you as a target intelligence. when we blame the code for our losses. or usually blame casting our own bad decisions. be a professional. you touch on honor and empathy and how we integrate that into ai and robotics a lot. at recall getting the answer. perhaps you could give us your answer to this our honor and empathy going to survive. i think a world where we don't have empathy is probably a
scary want to be in. peter have kinda mentioned this question about do you trust the math guy telling you where to go. in the central question is where do we use automation and people. each take over various task. there had been some studies by consultants. it could be automated today. it's not all jobs. a lot of things that people do can be celebrated to some degree. they are manually driving vehicles or aiming rifles. you're probably doing it wrong.
there are a lot of things could we train a machine. probably. over time we can do that using enough data and machine learning. or they can hold the rifle and not be. it could be a civilian that was on and protecting itself. you're giving up your position. and maybe that's not the right tactical thing to do in that instance. of course there is also the ethical component that you mentioned.
it is a tricky thing. there is a cost to having people involved in these decisions. they have to bear the moral burden. the fact that those who had to make very difficult choices choosing between two different wrongs head to live with that and i think it's a really interesting moral dilemma. it is not fear as a society. that we make a decision as a nation to go to war. a very small segment of the population does that. if no one valued human life.
i'm not sure that's totally what i'm living on either. there are so many ways to go about it. we must not forget that the main point in principle over this rule is reciprocity. they were designed so that armies would have a code of conduct that would be reciprocal. the first role we were able to agree to. there is a clear interest in all five keeping that convention. if you are men and women in uniform are captured they will be treated with dignity and not tortured. there is the reciprocity.
it makes for something very difficult. it tries to mitigate the impact of war while still allowing states to to use force if the situation demands two. if you are involved in this urgency. part of your mission is to try to pacify that area. it's much easier to do so if they see you are someone they can trust. it's more effective and finally i would say there is a political cost. our armed forces.
the way they fight tells us a lot about what we are what we stand for. is not just about what we do. i think it's absolutely vital for democracies to continue. i certainly hope that it will be the same. >> i'm very happy hopeful after that. bill gates it has very positive review. it provides a measure of comfort that he does not lose sleep but when i imagine 2040
battlefields it worries me because of the tireless fearless robot all-knowing ai combined with great power and capabilities that ends in some sort of global armageddon. what is the worst case in your future. i don't think it is a real risk of terminators giddiness. i think the things that worry me the most are are a slow movement over time towards more automation. it slowly pills weight human auto mission. it's just expressed in different ways. chinese scholars have talked about a battlefield singularity. where the pace of automation
and machine driven warfare equips in the speed of human decision-making. military forces are inside your own group. that can be your okay when you people making your own decisions. we don't want our units calling up to higher aspirations for everything. they get the accidents with machine speed. its most significant in cyberspace. there is a potential for harm scale and were not really prepared for it. we lack that resiliency. against some malware that
could be quite disruptive. do you have a worse case when you think of the future. >> i certainly have a number of worst-case scenarios but i will answer questions in a roundabout way we had mentioned so many important factors that could shape the future. i for talking about the future into potential worst-case scenario. i have to mention climate change. that is not to say i completely agree with everything paul said. if the robots don't get us. there is also a chance that something else is real. that something will be climate change. and certainly it is a threat
multiplier. the existing challenges more complex. ongoing lack of drinkable water. what essentially are climate prices. how do they respond to ever more severe and frequent extreme weather events. were already taking substantial work to respond to. it will become a much more important mission. of course there is a number of we should definitely prepare ourselves for that.
didn't adapt for the fact that the planet is giving some signs of distress. including our military and just to close on that. i find it very interesting that just last week the chief of defense. announced a new initiative aiming to make the british army independent for fossil fuels in the next few decades into really work on what we call nato green defense. it's very important as well. it's not to say that everything else is not important. but we should also keep an eye on those issues because they are going to affect our future very significantly. >> dr. singer you have a worst-case scenario in your story. what he think the worst cases can be.
>> the dark thing to say is we are living it whether it is a climate change issue and all of the craziness of yesterday over a hundred scientists from 36 different countries that concluded. remember how bad you thought it was gonna be. it's actually much worse. we only had to the year 2030 to take action that could turn things around. that links to the nightmare scenario for me the essence of the russian information warfare is not to make you love it makes you love us.
they are going back to its origin in the 1920s is to make you distrust everything and trust is something that is interesting. it's almost impossible to bring back. we have seen a systematic attack on the institutions that we trust and are crucial to a thriving american democracy. two trust in a independent judiciary trust in and freedom of speech. we are seeing each of these core institutions. they are under threat right now. and as a pledge that many of you will take from those of both abroad and a broad and domestic. we are shrugging off in the
polling data. that loss is almost impossible to bring back. whether you are talking about what happens if you have a highly politicized military. it is less likely to win wars. what happens how do you affect climate change it's very hard to do it if you are describing it as a conspiracy theory put out by china. that is my night nightmare scenario. they are under threat in the way and that did not happen when i was your age.
we just passed about an hour point which is often a time to think about stretching so i want everyone to stand up for a minute and stretch and when you sit back down those of you that are can have questions go ahead and remained standing where the authors have this last question. we can talk your purpose as graduates is to beat leaders ready to the future so how should you prepare it's one of the key takeaways today and after a panel addresses this final topic you can begin to stand and make yourself identified as someone that would like to ask a question. two or three can -- panel
members when you envisioned your future roles in life from their side of the stage we did not predict the developmental path that you would take. and the unexpected often makes us more prepared to lead. our audience can consider that when they are thinking about cleaning out leadership development. dr. singer would you tell us a story. it's gonna sound like i was kissing up to the concept of the concept itself. the advice that i would give that links back to experience
is all of the issues that we are talking about whether it's robotics, climate change, human rights in conflict cyber security they are inherently multi- disciplinary that is whether you are an engineer working on a robot we are now learning and we are pulling from the fields of biology and design. in meeting with the cyber security class earlier the keys to network defense involved. an understanding of economics and the best behavior. it's can be so key to whatever role you take on. in doing the work that i do i keep coming back to history. i grew up with a love of history in the military. when i am speaking to military audiences on how do you adapt
to change. i am referencing how the navy -- it may be may be adjusted to the aircraft carriers. they are looking at the examples for the marine and the 21st century but they're looking at how the marines had the concept back in the 1930s. it is something i'm constantly applying in future apology. your thoughts on your unexpected developmental path. one of my drill sergeants basic training. as we marched off was him
screaming at us never quit. you can actually get a lot done in life. i think there is a lot to be said for living a fulfilling life through being entrepreneurial and to simply doing things that you want to do. there is more constraints opportunities for that. great advice. volunteer for everything. but seek opportunities at everything you can. take advantage of what is out there and then out in the civilian world. find excuses to do it rather than not do it. very much deciding these things are not important the things you agree to do. and the things you turn down.
they will tell you the things they want you to do. ultimately it is your life. and carving out the time for that you can do really great stuff. i don't expect that was completely expected. what in your career has been driving you towards where you are today. it definitely was not expected i grew up in a north town. i'd really travel much going up. is certainly something i never expected would happen. i think it would really relate to very much what they say.
to be able to find what gives you a sense of purpose and then that would drive a lot of career choices and you can help you to shift from one field to another. it may sound a little bit distracted. it's so coherent. i'm interested in how do we mitigate the impact of conflict. for me that's what doesn't. it's quite a good thing to have that to fall back on. is this furthering what i think is my contribution in my 2 cents it very much goes in
line with that focusing. the additional point goes in line with what you mentioned about international experience. to really be open to have your ideas challenged. he seemed to be seem to be there to agree with us. and enough it brings us to bring whether it really allows us to relate to each other. to meet my experience one of the best ways to challenge my preconceived notion. has been to travel. and the more different the culture and place it so many notions that i had been brought up with.
it's a very useful exercise. i heard part of this program. they also had international experience i think that is incredibly valuable especially in the globalized work that would be vented today. so we had time for questions i would like to start over here. see mckay hope you guys are doing well today. in the world today we see a lot of warfare it's a large part of what we see. if you can answer it. what would you say how can it be prevented does just dr. singer start with that.
a great question. but is very it's very important to tackle the issue of organized crime it's something we head under estimated for very long. i think it is a key challenge for us to tackle. in terms of how do you do that. most of the strategies have this opponent. they are trying to undermined their model and try to make it be harder for them to process. there is an economic and financial aspect that's very important but again there is the ruth -- root causes. what drives people to join the
organization. i always go back to that. we have to address the political conflict very carefully. this is not especially important in regions of the world. in north africa we see more and more with the criminal organizations it transcends the public security. i think it's a very good question. do you think future battlegrounds will be impacted by the narco trafficking? >> yes and they are. in the case of isis which for a while was a terrorist group with the biggest terrorist
group. the point is a lot of substantial portion was there. with iniquities of oil. for the link between terrorism. it makes what happens in the criminal world very relevant to civilization operations all around the world. dr. québec. as my students know i am very old i started programming in 1965 but i have followed developments in computer science all of my career. i am appear to give you a warning there are two factors i did not hear mentioned number one neural networks develop algorithms that are
incomprehensible to the human beings who are depending on those algorithms. and there is evidence of that. one of the earliest networks back in about 1988 was tasked with developing an integrated surface. and it worked. and none of the electrical engineers could figure out how it worked. until they trapped in detail and a couple of weeks. back in the 1930s they articulated a principle the theorem of incomplete list nests included a prediction that all self referential systems are inherently chaotic where chaos in mathematical terms means having disrupted responses to changes in input.
those two factors should worry the hell out of us and leave it to you to comment. i think on the first one we take it even further. we take it back to what paul brought relevant to the chinese approach in the hope for in the terms of the battlefield break through. the moment where people it always comes back to games. when the computer first beats the top human chest master. ibm locked that. for china in particular your counterparts in the pla.
it was when that machine beat someone at the game of go. if you're not familiar with it. it's a game of strategy that is thousands of years old. and relevant to the comment that you brought up. it was not nearly that the breakthrough happened in this game it was the way that the machine one it came up with moves that humans who have been playing this game for over 2000 years never thought of on their own. and that is that potential of it being a battlefield breakthrough. it is what is excited the pla. but as you lay out is layout is not just this possibility.
we have medicines that are being discovered so to speak by ai by bringing together information in a way that human doctors and researchers would not had thought of. there's also the negative of it. the advice that this machine is giving you. you never would have come up with it on your own and you don't understand it but that's also the challenge of wind do you go contrary to the machine because you did not recommend why that has this why did they get a loan. i never could have done this on my own or is it because the data that was plugged into it was biased against african-americans i did not
make up a example there. that is a true story. or who gets the selected for selected for promotion or admission to a college we will take more data than ever before. it's gonna sift it together in ways that a human never could. and then guess what it found that young white men who played lacrosse were the best for college. it's not just about the inability to understand it. how does the military by something that holds the prospect of advising you better on the other hand no one can tell you how it works. history shows us that mankind
that they are unfair during warfare. do you think ai that thinks and acts on its own could be outlined in the future. >> we will land squarely with you. the track record of trying to regulate weapons. as a real mismatch. there had been some successes or things that were largely successful like efforts to move away from chemical weapons. there is other miserable failures it is a hard problem. if you violate these rules what is a consequence. the real issue is
reciprocity. it largely has to do with that militaries agreeing. to not use certain weapons. it might be more horrible or unrestrained in some way. on what is the thing that you're not wanting to do. it turns out where you locate those. my problem for ai. you draw that line. there are a lot of expressions underway and looks like a really tough problem. we will all be sharing your
mike here shortly. i think particularly to ai the aspect they have. that movement of banning increasing entente to misuse with the military. simultaneously to that. are the civilian world. let's move forward ten years. and then maybe there is something in this room. they will operate them in the aerial systems. they will wake up in the suburbs of las vegas and be driven to the air force base by the autonomous car. not just a tesla.
but once they enter the air force base. we say no. we still operate like it's 2008. i don't think that happens. the nature of the technology. what i do think as possible is that we will see certain restrictions on not the technology but the where you use it and how you use it so for instance to your concerns there are very different civilian casualty concerns with autonomous weapon systems in the land domain versus under siege warfare. whether it is a tank or a bus. it is not jones e but jealousy but that's really good ear.
it's actually a computer recognizing the algorithms the torpedoes that are fired. there are mostly automated. if you get it wrapped there's no such thing as an underwater cruise ship. we are okay allowing autonomy and undersea warfare but maybe not within land warfare as an example. thank you for coming. i'm representing the men's lacrosse team. you mentioned earlier about finding the important information. how do you see that coming in the future. as that a simple google search or will it be through the art er or something like that. the first is that there is a i
mean used to try to distinguish that for example as we see the creation with the false imagery as it becomes more and more sigs for cicada and we will rely on artificial intelligence to a shift underneath it and what's fascinating going back to this the blurring line between war and conflict is the groups that are researching that type of technology to identify that it is fake. are the face's books of the world and darpa. facebook because they think they need it for their platform. now, that technology is for the good. but all of the data also shows that it is insufficient and
what we really had missing in the united states is digital literacy. if you grew up in finland or estonia. besides being taught your regular studies and being taught hygiene. wash her hands, and the like. which you are all taught you would have also been taught how to defend yourself online. what are the emotional tails that are going after you. that is why the estonians in finland's of the world are more resilience against the threat. as i can open territory to it. it's a great example of how you aligned national security issues with education you are not just be better citizens it would help public health you
are all dealing with the return of diseases that we did not had to would help you all be better consumers. it is a multiple good thing. and it's strange that it is missing within our system. i wanted to add another layer of complexity. another layer of complexity that we can have better technology it actually accounts for a relatively small account. it is one of the main players at the moment.
it's much more of a manipulation of the truth. and much harder for human. in artificial intelligence. as our technology gets better. the operations get more sophisticated. and even if we have a perfect technology for it. that is just to add another layer of complexity. so clearly we need a lot more time for your questions and there will be a chance for that over at the signing. i'm sorry to send you back to your seats for the end of this. thank you audience and panel you are all very fantastic we
had covered a lot of import and aspects important aspects of your future leadership problems and students i appreciate your willingness to embark on the norway's experience. those of you who could defend freedom. join the panel members in the milano ballroom. and finally tonight you are all invited to continue parts of this discussion. at 1900 in mack hall. weaponization of social media. thank you panel.