Defense Department Looking Beyond 5G

Sur le même sujet

• 

  26 octobre 2022 | International, Aérospatial

  Boeing reports $3.3 billion loss as KC-46, other defense programs drag

  Boeing's defense sector results have pulled the company deeply into the red so far in 2022.

• 

  26 septembre 2018 | International, C4ISR

  Members of Congress look to make AI a priority

  By: Jessie Bur Congress and the executive branch need to make a more concerted effort to address and prepare for the rise of artificial intelligence, Reps. Will Hurd, R-Texas, and Robin Kelly, D-Ill., said in a white paper released Sept. 25. The congressmen, who serve as the chairman and ranking member of the House IT Subcommittee, compiled information gathered in past congressional hearings and meetings with experts to argue for the criticality of federal input in the many facets of AI. “In light of that potential for disruption, it's critical that the federal government address the different challenges posed by AI, including its current and future applications. The following paper presents lessons learned from the Subcommittee's oversight and hearings on AI and sets forth recommendations for moving forward,” Hurd and Kelly wrote. “Underlying these recommendations is the recognition the United States cannot maintain its global leadership in AI absent political leadership from Congress and the executive branch. Therefore, the Subcommittee recommends increased engagement on AI by Congress and the administration.” According to the White Paper, under current trends the United States is soon slated to be outpaced in research and development investments by countries like China that have prioritized artificial intelligence investment. “Particularly concerning is the prospect of an authoritarian country, such as Russia or China, overtaking the United States in AI. As the Subcommittee's hearings showed, AI is likely to have a significant impact in cybersecurity, and American competitiveness in AI will be critical to ensuring the United States does not lose any decisive cybersecurity advantage to other nation-states,” Hurd and Kelly wrote. Hurd characterized the Chinese investment in AI as a race with the U.S. “It's a race, we all know this, and one of the things we need [is] a national strategy, similar to what we've seen in the conversations around quantum computing yesterday at the White House. What we saw almost a decade ago when it came to nanotechnology. And part of that strategy does include increasing basic research, opening up data sets and making sure the U.S. is playing a part, leader on ethics when it comes to artificial intelligence,” said Hurd in a Sept. 25 press call. The paper applauded current investments in R&D, such as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's creation of the Artificial Intelligence Exploration program, and encouraged government hosting more “Grand Challenges” like those conducted by DARPA to encourage outside-government innovation. “I do believe the federal government has a role, because we're sitting on data sets that could be used as a backbone of a Grand Challenge around artificial intelligence,” said Hurd, who added that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, healthcare agencies and many other components of the federal government possess the data to administer meaningful AI competitions. “I think this would be a maybe a great opportunity for a public private partnership,” added Kelly on the press call. The paper also identified four primary challenges that can arise as AI becomes more prevalent: workforce, privacy, bias and malicious use. AI has the potential to both put portions of the workforce out of a job as more tasks become automated and increase the number of jobs for those trained to work with artificial intelligence. Hurd and Kelly called on the federal government to lead the way in adapting its workforce by planning for and investing in training programs that will enable them to transition into AI work. As with many technologies, AI has the potential to infringe on privacy, as intelligent products or systems such as virtual assistants constantly collect data on individuals. That data could be exploited by both the company that created the technology and hackers looking to steal personal information. “The growing collection and use of personal data in AI systems and applications raises legitimate concerns about privacy. As such, federal agencies should review federal privacy laws, regulations, and judicial decisions to determine how they may already apply to AI products within their jurisdiction, and—where necessary—update existing regulations to account for the addition of AI,” Hurd and Kelly wrote. The white paper also calls on federal agencies to make government data more available to the public for AI experimentation, while also ensuring that any AI algorithms used by agencies to “make consequential decisions about individuals” are “inspectable” to ensure that they operate without coded bias. According to Hurd, the question of whether and how that inspectable information would be made available to the public still needs to be asked. Finally, Hurd and Kelly called on government entities to consider how AI may be used to perpetuate cyber attacks or otherwise cause harm. However, while recommending that agencies look to existing regulation and statute and some limited changes to those statutes, the paper encouraged a similar hands off approach that the federal government took to the development of the internet. “The government should begin by first assessing whether the risks to public safety or consumers already fall within existing regulatory frameworks and, if so, consideration should be made as to whether those existing frameworks can adequately address the risks,” Hurd and Kelly wrote. “At minimum, a widely agreed upon standard for measuring the safety and security of AI products and applications should precede any new regulations. A common taxonomy also would help facilitate clarity and enable accurate accounting of skills and uses of AI.” https://www.federaltimes.com/federal-oversight/congress/2018/09/25/members-of-congress-look-to-make-ai-a-priority

• 

  3 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval

  Top Marine ‘signaling’ to industry that F-35 cuts are on the table

  By: Aaron Mehta How will US Marines adjust for the future fight? | Reagan Defense Forum 2019 WASHINGTON — The top officer in the U.S. Marine Corps is sticking to the planned procurement of the F-35 joint strike fighter — but indicated a willingness to cut planes in the future if analysis says it makes sense. Marine Commandant Gen. David Berger told reporters Wednesday that he is a firm believer in the capabilities the F-35 is bringing, in particular the jump-jet B model favored by the service. However, Berger made it clear he's not wedded to long-term procurement plans, at a time the corps is shedding legacy missions as it pivots to focus to a primarily naval-focused service. “Right now, the program of record plows ahead as it is,” he said. “But I'm signaling to the industry, we have to be prepared to adjust as the operating environment adjusts. Right now, the program of record stays the same, but we will — we must — adapt to the adversary and we must adapt to the operating environment that we're challenged with being in.” Berger noted that an upcoming independent review of his force posture plans, expected to be completed in the next few months, could be a forcing function for more changes. Already, his planning guidance to the corps changed how many planes are featured in each F-35 squad, from 16 to 10. Longstanding plans call for the Marines to procure 353 of the F-35B and 67 of the F-35C carrier variants. “There's nothing like it,” Berger said of the jet. “The F-35B, the ability to operate from austere airfields and ships both, [is] incredible. In wargames, it's one of the handful of capabilities that really caused an adversary problems, because it is so flexible, it's deployable ashore or from ship. Gamechanger is sort of an overused phrase, but I'm a huge advocate of the F-35 and its capabilities.” Broadly speaking, Berger said, what will drive how many F-35s are in a squadron going forward, or how many the Corps eventually buys, comes down to maintenance — a longstanding issue for the stealthy jet. “If the maintenance readiness of the F-35 proves to be very, very strong, then of course, like any other system you need less of them because more of them are up all the time. On the other hand, if it turns out not to be so, then you're going to need more of them, to account for the ones that are in repair, that are down right now,” he said. Complicating that issue is what he called the “unique” supply chain for the jet, which in theory lets parts flow in from all over the world, as opposed to the traditional U.S. based supply. “In all aspects, we absolutely know we will learn along the way, and if its appropriate we will make adjustments” to either the squad level or the overall buy, Berger said. “But it's not a lack of confidence in the airframe at all.” https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/04/01/top-marine-signaling-to-industry-that-f-35-cuts-are-on-the-table/