SECURITY ORIENTED DEVELOPEMENTS - WORLD

[<Reaper>666]

Automated target selection and weapon release without a human in the loop is quite a recent shift outside the highest intensity situations such as late Cold War fleet defence against mass missile/air attack. In terms of responsibility, it is however a wonderful way of evading it so that noone can be blamed for the killing. Some people are obsessed about it as the new wundertoy, but I really don't like at all the abandonment of responsibility for the act of killing. You kill someone, you don't blame the algorithm or the manufacturer for making the choice.

Killier robots, OTOH, allow to generalize this behaviour, to distant oneself from the killing.

If quite a recent shift we call previous 5-6 decades . . .
Also in case of shifting responsibility, responsible are always the people operating such systems and giving orders, which given the most famous example was covered becouse of politics and automated or not, it didn't change a thing. It is only relevant for internal cases when you have blue on blue, and then it cames from lack of training and lack of knowledge how systems work, or lack of sensibility of use. That is a hardly a case of automatisation problem.

There are no non-human OODA loops. Human is always inside the loop, which may look different but still incorporates human deciding element. Even the most automated systems do not work as popular knowledge portrays them nor autonomous alghoritms are as autonomous as they are painted actually.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

If quite a recent shift we call previous 5-6 decades . . .
Also in case of shifting responsibility, responsible are always the people operating such systems and giving orders, which given the most famous example was covered becouse of politics and automated or not, it didn't change a thing. It is only relevant for internal cases when you have blue on blue, and then it cames from lack of training and lack of knowledge how systems work, or lack of sensibility of use. That is a hrdly a case of automatisation problem.

There iare no non-human OODA loops. Human is always inside the loop, which may look different but still incorporates human deciding element. Even the most automated systems do not work as popular knowledge portrays them nor autonomous alghoritms are as autonomous as they are painted actually.

Humans tend to be in the loop for target selection or weapon release with the computer firing at a target chosen by a human or indicating likely targets for a human to shoot at if needed. Removing them from both isn't an old thing by far. A cruise missile is sent at a specific point or a specific target with radar/IR profile, it doesn't look for human beings among many and decide independently which one is an enemy.

 

[<Reaper>666]

A cruise missile is sent at a specific point or a specific target with radar/IR profile, it doesn't look for human beings among many and decide independently which one is an enemy.

If you hook it to the targeting matrix tracking individual targets by their unique signature, in case of people, biometrics, it is possible and works and it is still not as independent as one may think becouse it is the same mechanism as with AShMs or BATs seeking warships or tanks based on programmed radar, IR and acustic signature for example. Who is dying is ultimately decided by human who targets. ie feeds the signature data into system and takes an action by oredering release of the weapon.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

If you hook it to the targeting matrix tracking individual targets by their unique signature, in case of people, biometrics, it is possible and works and it is still not as independent as one may think becouse it is the same mechanism as with AShMs or BATs seeking warships or tanks based on programmed radar, IR and acustic signature for example. Who is dying is ultimately decided by human who targets. ie feeds the signature data into system and takes an action by oredering release of the weapon.

Human in the loop. They take the decision, and damn I'm glad we have an extra brain in the system, especially when, say, the early warning sensor network decided that, yes, the US just launched a massive surprise attack and the human element actually think about the data being shown to him.

Not that such a scenario could ever happen IRL, no siree.

 

[<Reaper>666]

Human in the loop. They take the decision, and damn I'm glad we have an extra brain in the system, especially when, say, the early warning sensor network decided that, yes, the US just launched a massive surprise attack and the human element actually think about the data being shown to him.

Not that such a scenario could ever happen IRL, no siree.

You know you are comparing different enviroments and you know that human component in weapon systems and command chain is substitution in many cases for automated processes? Becouse limited autonomy in next gen smart weapons or BMS subprograms for use on tactical level is something much different to the command chain of startegic deterrent.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

You know you are comparing different enviroments and you know that human component in weapon systems and command chain is substitution in many cases for automated processes? Becouse limited autonomy in next gen smart weapons or BMS subprograms for use on tactical level is something much different to the command chain of startegic deterrent.

Nah, the comparison isn't too strange. In the end, this is about giving a robot the complete control over the identification, decision and execution of the killing of another human being. And man, if we aren't able to get through a fucking Captcha lock reliably with a script, it is nothing short of insanity to give AIs control over guns and missiles, period. Recognize a cat as reliably as an average school shooter and then we'll talk.

Thing is, I've never been as doubtful of the wonderful promises of technology and computing than since I actually did STEM stuff.

 

[<Reaper>666]

Thing is, I've never been as doubtful of the wonderful promises of technology and computing than since I actually did STEM stuff.

There is a difference between STEM and advanced weapon system developement, just like there is a difference between blind belief in "sophistication" and rational developement and the use.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

There is a difference between STEM and advanced weapon system developement, just like there is a difference between blind belief in "sophistication" and rational developement and the use.

It definitely shows how far the gap is between industrial promises and real performance. As I said, if you want to give a gun to a system that cannot recognize a cat as well as your random school shooter would, you're drinking the Kool-Aid because you're giving a licence to kill to a system less reliable than a ten year-old child soldier. But, heh, buzzwords, so it's okay!

In the end, though, these are killer robots and not a nice path to take.

 

[<Reaper>666]

[...] you're drinking the Kool-Aid because you're giving a licence to kill to a system less reliable than a ten year-old child soldier. But, heh, buzzwords, so it's okay! [...]

You once again pauperise meaning and ascribe to yourself common knowledge, showing lack of understanding about how weapon systems are developed and used actually - you do not run around throwing around bombs and missiles, especially autonomous attack variety. No one is doing such thing you are implying from precisely the fact that common systems have problems with discriminating potential targets, but it is not equal for not developing better systems in future. Also no one is deploying unsuited system for role it is not build to solve, like in your example.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

You once again pauperise meaning and ascribe to yourself common knowledge, showing lack of understanding about how weapon systems are developed and used actually - you do not run around throwing around bombs and missiles, especially autonomous attack variety. No one is doing such thing you are implying from precisely the fact that common systems have problems with discriminating potential targets, but it is not equal for not developing better systems in future. Also no one is deploying unsuited system for role it is not build to solve, like in your example.

Except Russia, Turkey, Azebaidjan, etc., AKA countries that give no shit about hitting the wrong people.

 

[Scottty]

Except Russia, Turkey, Azebaidjan, etc., AKA countries that give no shit about hitting the wrong people.

I'm not confident that even Western goverments nowadays lose much sleep over "collateral damage".

 

[<Reaper>666]

Except Russia, Turkey, Azebaidjan, etc., AKA countries that give no shit about hitting the wrong people.

No one cares who will be hit, as long as objectives will be met, population reliably calm and blue on blue does not happen.
It is called collateral damage, which you keep as low as it is possible, but without sacrificing your main goal.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

No one cares who will be hit, as long as objectives will be met, population reliably calm and blue on blue does not happen.
It is called collateral damage, which you keep as low as it is possible, but without sacrificing your main goal.

Well, in that case, I have something much cheaper and more effective than killer robots: cluster munitions and land mines.

 

[<Reaper>666]

Well, in that case, I have something much cheaper and more effective than killer robots: cluster munitions and land mines.

We both know what problems mass employment of these generates especially on mobile battlefield for own side.
And we also both know who is using them and who is signing conventions and why and who not.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

We both know what problems mass employment of these generates especially on mobile battlefield for own side.
And we also both know who is using them and who is signing conventions and why and who not.

Gee, it's just as if killer robots aren't exactly the shining future of effective warfare but more of a blunt instrument whose main appeal is the ease they offer to dilute and deny responsibility for war crimes. So, yeah, let´s call them for what they are: killer robots.

 

[<Reaper>666]

Gee, it's just as if killer robots aren't exactly the shining future of effective warfare but more of a blunt instrument whose main appeal is the ease they offer to dilute and deny responsibility for war crimes. So, yeah, let´s call them for what they are: killer robots.

No, just like idea behind PGMs and "smart", "briliant" and "genius" munitions and weapon systems was centered on maximum increase in effectiveness and response time. It never had to do with anything remotely approching humanitarism and lessering suffereing of potential collaterals - you wanted to have something that can reliably destroy enemy by companies and battalions with one salvo while lessering collateral pollution of battlefield with unexploded ordinance, which is hampering movements of friendly forces. Fact that individual protection of targets have risen and was continously rising also contributed to that.
Also it is much cheaper in financial, human and material dimension.
Idea of diluting responsibility for war crimes was always there, see May Lai or Algeria or World Wars, you do not need remote control nor autonomous warfare for that.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

It's much, much better at diluting the responsibilities since it removes the guilty parties altogether, leaving only the civilian victims, all the while being as competent as AIs to identify behaviours and activities in complex visual environments, AKA utterly awful. Better use cluster ammunition and be done with it if you want to go for the indiscriminate massacre. But then, I guess I'm just not seeing the beauty of the promises from the MIC.

 

[<Reaper>666]

It's much, much better at diluting the responsibilities since it removes the guilty parties altogether, leaving only the civilian victims, all the while being as competent as AIs to identify behaviours and activities in complex visual environments, AKA utterly awful. [...]

We both know that, that is why it is being researched and tested and we are long way from actually fielding "real" unshackled AI driven autonomous weapon systems.
And no, it is not about diluting responsibility for warcrimes, genocide and conducting massacress. We can dilute it better already. AI driven omniscient BMS is even worse on diluting becouse it records and stores everything what is being done, down to each push of the button on keyboard, but no one have and will have in any foreseeable future such system. Even modern BMS are not as holistic as they should and we would like them to be.

 

[<Reaper>666]

AMX-56 CLASSIFIED SPECS LEAKED​

Classified tank specs leaked on War Thunder game forums – again

Another tank crewman has leaked classified information to the War Thunder game forums - this time he's French.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

Exactly what is being written in the title.
Some French tanker have taken clue from his British friend in service and have leaked specs of his beloved ride. British cannot be better, naturally

In all seriousness, we can now analyse how online celebricy is impacting social behauviour of members of military and what reprecussions it can bring.

 

[<Reaper>666]

Turkey expands into Space​

It seems Turkey plans expansion into space and creation of necessary infrastructure to support it.
Apparently it involves:
- building cosmodrome
- creation of independend global positioning system
- moon landing
From all places to place a cosmodrome, Turkey apprently plans building one in Somalia.

Kosmodrom w Somalii, lot na Księżyc i własny "GPS". Pytania o tureckie plany kosmiczne [KOMENTARZ]

Prof. Ibrahim Kucuk, szef departamentu nauk o kosmosie w tureckiej agencji kosmicznej (TUA) zadeklarował na początku października br., że głównym celem jego państwa w dziedzinie kosmicznej (nad którym obecnie trwają intensywne prace) jest umieszczenie własnego lądownika na Księżycu. Założenie to...

www.space24.pl

Turkey will have its own cosmodrome in Somalia

Turkey wants to build its own spaceport in Somalia, spending about $ 350 million on this as part of its national space program, worth more than $ 1 billion, the Turkish newspaper Daily Sabah writes about this, citing the London-based Middle East Eye news agency covering events on

en.topcor.ru

Turkey to Build a Rocket Launch Site in Somalia to Support its USD 1 billion Moon Mission - Space in Africa

Turkey’s recently announced space programme, which aims to make a soft landing on the moon in 2028, will cost upwards […]

africanews.space

All of it is part of the plan of modernisation of Turkey into a world class country.

 

[<Reaper>666]

USS CONNECTICUT SUFFERS UNDERWATER COLLISION
11 SAILORS INJURED​

UPDATED: Attack Submarine USS Connecticut Suffers Underwater Collision in South China Sea - USNI News

This post has been updated with additional details on the injuries to the crew of USS Connecticut and the location of the collision. Almost a dozen sailors have been injured after a U.S. nuclear attack submarine hit an unknown underwater object in the South China Sea, USNI News has learned. The...

news.usni.org

Seawolf-Class Attack Sub Damaged in Collision in the South China Sea

One of the most sophisticated submarines in the world, the USS Connecticut, sustained an underwater...

www.maritime-executive.com

One Of The Navy's Prized Seawolf Class Submarines Has Suffered An Underwater Collision (Updated)

USS Connecticut's nuclear reactor was unaffected by the undersea accident, but the Navy won't say what exactly the submarine hit.

www.thedrive.com

US submarine hits underwater object in South China Sea

A US nuclear powered submarine struck an object underwater in the South China Sea on Saturday, according to two defense officials.

edition.cnn.com

To make it more nebulpus, no one is specifying what have hit the US sub and caused extended damage enough to hurt 11 people.
All have taken the place during allied naval training that included three carriers from both US and British navies, and plethora of consorts from other nations, Japan included.

 

[Scottty]

​

It seems Turkey plans expansion into space and creation of necessary infrastructure to support it.
Apparently it involves:
- building cosmodrome
- creation of independend global positioning system
- moon landing

Manned moon landing?

 

[<Reaper>666]

Manned moon landing?

First one with rover. Later, who knows?

 

[<Reaper>666]

CHINA ENERGY CRISIS​

How China’s energy crisis happened, in six steps – The China Project

Rising demand for Chinese goods, climbing prices for coal, and a government campaign to reduce power consumption have collided — and caused an energy crisis in China. Here’s how it happened, and what might come next.

supchina.com

Could China’s power crisis help or harm its green energy push?

China is the world’s biggest producer and consumer of coal, and right now its inventories are at record lows.

www.aljazeera.com

China’s power crisis | South China Morning Post

China is used to seeing power supply cuts in parts of the country each year, but their frequency has increased sharply since the second half of 2020, escalating to a crisis in September 2021. Potential causes include Beijing-dictated carbon reduction targets to lower emissions, and an urgent...

www.scmp.com

China's energy crisis highlights weaknesses in Xi's power plans

Liberalising the power market still poses risks to consumers; more storage needed to manage intermittency of renewables

www.business-standard.com

China scrambles to fix power crunch, tame runaway raw material markets

Roiled by widening power curbs that have disrupted industrial operations, Chinese commodity producers and manufacturers may finally be getting some relief.

www.reuters.com

Energy crisis hits Chinese economy

China is rationing power in a move that could threaten the Australian resources sector, showing the dark side of high prices for Australian coal and gas.

www.afr.com

Xi's carbon emission ambition causes massive blackouts in China

While China is attempting to lead the narrative of tackling climate change on the global stage, local manufacturers and residents are crying out on social media as various provinces across the country experience power shortages.

www.abc.net.au

Russia provides necessary energy suplies

Chiny doceniają rosyjską pomoc w zakresie dostaw energii

Zwiększenie dostaw energii elektrycznej z Rosji do Chin pozwala złagodzić napiętą sytuację - wynika z oświadczenia zawartego na stronie Państwowej Korporacji Sieci Energetycznej Chin.

www.energetyka24.com

 

[<Reaper>666]

Parliamentary elections in Iraq​

Wybory w Iraku: faworytem antyamerykańskie ugrupowanie

O godz. 7 czasu lokalnego rozpoczęły się przyśpieszone wybory do Rady Reprezentantów - jednoizbowego parlamentu Iraku. Do głosowania uprawnionych jest ok. 25 mln osób. Irakijczycy wybierają w niedzielę 329 deputowanych. Wyniki będą ogłoszone w poniedziałek.

www.defence24.pl

Of note: the favourite party is Sadr Movement, with no one else than Muktada as-Sadr as their head, famous for their anti-USA rhetoric.
Elections are electronic and only those who have biometric IDs can partake.
To provide secure enviroment for elections, travel restrictions between provinces have been placed.

Also a very good overview of failure of US nation building in Iraq made by Repetytowicz.

Irak to nie Afganistan – fałszywe „analogie” i odmienne realia [OPINIA]

Pojawiające się porównania Iraku z Afganistanem są całkowicie chybione. Interwencja w Iraku miała zupełnie inne przyczyny i charakter niż w Afganistanie, a dzisiejsza obecność wojsk USA i innych państw NATO jest z nią dość luźno związana. Choć w obu przypadkach można mówić o porażce...

www.defence24.pl

"[..]Contrary to the war in Afghanistan, the military intervention in Iraq was not caused by the attack by that country, or by the forces under its protection, on the US. Apart from various formal reasons and speculations about the actual causes of the invasion of 2003, both the declared and, to a large extent, the actual purpose of the occupation was to build a new, democratic state. While in Afghanistan it was a secondary target and it ended in a complete flop, in Iraq the situation is much more complex. The US defeat in Iraq in this context can be said in the sense that the effects were not (and are not) consistent with the expectations of American theorists who ignore local cultural conditions. In particular, the assumption that the democratic elections will be won by US-favored candidates who will pursue a secular, liberal policy, creating an American model of democracy in Iraq and pursuing a foreign policy friendly to the interests of the US and Israel, and hostile to Iran, has proved wrong. The latter assumption was based on the doctrine of democratic peace, according to which democratic states do not fight each other.

When the Americans realized that their candidates would not win the election, they wanted to introduce some indirect mechanisms to guarantee the right result, but succumbed to pressure from Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the most important Shi'ite clergyman in Iraq. The new Iraqi constitution of 2005 was the result of a cross-sectarian (Shi'ite-Sunni-Kurdish) compromise, and while the US played a key role in its creation, the Iraqis accepted it in an unadulterated referendum.

Moreover, while the Sunnis initially challenged the new political reality, they quickly realized the futility of such an approach. The fact is that a civil war broke out in 2007 between Shi'ite militias and Sunni jihadists led by Al Qaeda and forces linked to the overthrown Baath party regime, but it did not result in a significant boycott of Iraqi state elections and institutions by any ethnosectarian group. It is worth emphasizing that even the lowest voter turnout in Iraq (parliamentary elections in 2018) was twice as high as the turnout in the last presidential election in Afghanistan. Moreover, while it was commonly believed that the elections in Afghanistan were rigged, this was not the case in Iraq, and the proof of this is both the fact that the candidates favored by the USA did not win, as well as the fact that the leading politicians lost in them, and several times there were peaceful transfer of power.[...]"