Web and Tech

Directed-Energy Weapons (DEWs): The Future of Warfare?

Michael Cessna July 26, 2024

Long a staple of science fiction, Directed-Energy Weapons (DEWs) are rapidly becoming a reality in modern warfare. These advanced weapons emit focused energy in the form of lasers, microwaves, or particle beams, promising to revolutionize military operations. While experiments with directed energy began as early as the 1930s, the term “LASER” (Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation) only emerged in 1960 with the invention of the first laser by American engineer and physicist Theodore Maiman.

*Theodore Maiman, on the 25th anniversary of the invention of the laser, 1985. Los Angeles Reader Photo. CCA/4.0 International.*

Since Maiman’s groundbreaking work, laser technology has revolutionized numerous fields. In our daily lives, lasers are ubiquitous, found in CD/DVD players, barcode scanners, fiber-optic communications, and various medical treatments. From precision measurements to advanced manufacturing processes, the impact of laser technology on modern society is difficult to overstate.

Military applications of laser technology have been equally transformative. As early as 1962, the U.S. military began developing laser-guided targeting systems. By 1967, Texas Instruments had developed the world’s first laser-guided, “smart” bomb, the BOLT-117. This innovation marked a significant shift in air warfare, moving from mass bombing raids with high casualty rates to precise, targeted strikes that minimize collateral damage. The ability to guide munitions with pinpoint accuracy has not only increased military effectiveness but also reduced civilian casualties and collateral damage in combat zones.

*BOLT-117 aircraft bomb in the Hill Air Force Base Museum. Photo by Wikimedia User Wilson44691. CCA/1.0 Universal.*

In the realm of surveillance and reconnaissance, LIDAR (LIght Detection And Ranging) technology, first developed in the 1960s, has proven invaluable. LIDAR can create highly detailed 3D maps, even penetrating dense vegetation to reveal hidden structures. This capability has profound implications for both military operations and civilian applications. In warfare, LIDAR allows for precise terrain mapping and the detection of camouflaged targets. In the civilian sector, it’s crucial for autonomous vehicle navigation, urban planning, and environmental monitoring.

Despite these advancements, the development of combat-ready DEWs has faced significant challenges. The U.S. Navy’s AN/SEQ-3 Laser Weapon System, installed on the USS Ponce (LPD-15) in 2014, was the first publicly deployed DEW. Designed to counter small UAVs, missiles, and boats, it represented a milestone in DEW development. However, issues with recharge times and beam coherence led to its replacement in favor of the Lockheed-Martin HELIOS (High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance) system – currently fitted to the destroyer USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51).

*The U.S. Navy’s AN/SEQ-3 Laser Weapon System (LaWS) aboard USS Ponce (LPD-15) Laser while deployed to the Arabian Gulf in 2014. U.S. Navy photo by John F. Williams. Public Domain.*

The HELIOS system represents a significant leap forward in DEW technology. With double the power output of its predecessor, it promises improved performance against a wider range of threats. The system’s integration with the Aegis Combat System on the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers demonstrates the Navy’s commitment to incorporating DEWs into its existing defense architecture.

U.S. Navy fire control team aboard operate the AN/SEQ-3 Laser Weapon System (LaWS) aboard USS Ponce (LPD-15) during an operational demonstration in the Arabian Gulf in 2014. U.S. Navy photo by John F. Williams. Public Domain.

The primary obstacles in DEW development are bulk and power requirements. While progress has been made in reducing system size, power technology lags behind. The slow recharge times of capacitors remain a significant hurdle, though ongoing research promises future improvements. Scientists and engineers are exploring various solutions, including advanced battery technologies, super-capacitors, and even compact nuclear power sources for future DEW systems.

Another challenge facing DEW development is atmospheric interference. Lasers, in particular, can be affected by moisture, dust, and other particulates in the air, potentially reducing their effectiveness over long distances. Adaptive optics and beam control technologies are being developed to mitigate these issues, allowing for more consistent performance in varied environmental conditions.

Despite these challenges, the potential benefits of DEWs are substantial. In conventional warfare, ammunition can occupy up to 50% of an army’s logistical capacity. DEWs could significantly reduce this burden, revolutionizing military logistics. With theoretically unlimited “ammunition” as long as power is available, DEWs could dramatically extend the operational capabilities of military units in the field.

Moreover, as space becomes an increasingly important military domain, the low mass-to-effect ratio of DEWs makes them particularly attractive for orbital and anti-satellite operations. Traditional kinetic weapons are less suitable for space warfare due to the risk of creating debris fields that could endanger friendly assets. DEWs offer the potential for “clean” space combat, disabling enemy satellites without creating hazardous space debris.

The strategic implications of DEWs extend beyond their direct combat applications. Their potential to alter the balance of power has sparked a global race in DEW development. Nations worldwide are investing heavily in this technology, recognizing its transformative potential in future conflicts. This has led to concerns about a new arms race, with countries striving to gain a technological edge in directed energy systems.

As DEW technology matures, it raises important questions about the nature of future warfare. Will the advent of these weapons make conflicts more or less likely? How will they affect military strategies and international relations? The potential for DEWs to serve as both offensive and defensive systems complicates traditional notions of deterrence and military balance.

Furthermore, the development of DEWs has implications for international law and arms control agreements. Current treaties may need to be revised to account for these new weapons, which don’t fit neatly into existing categories of conventional or non-conventional arms. The potential for DEWs to cause temporary or permanent blindness in humans has already led to restrictions on certain types of laser weapons under the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons.

The ethical considerations surrounding DEWs are also significant. While they have the potential to reduce collateral damage compared to conventional explosives, concerns remain about their long-term effects on human targets and the environment. The possibility of DEWs being used for crowd control or as non-lethal weapons such as the Active Denial System (ADS) also raises questions about potential abuse and human rights implications.

In addition to combat applications, DEWs have potential uses in other areas of defense. For example, high-powered microwaves could be used to disable electronic systems, providing a non-kinetic option for neutralizing enemy capabilities. This could be particularly useful in urban environments or situations where minimizing physical damage is crucial.

Research into DEWs is also driving advancements in related fields. The development of high-energy lasers, for instance, has led to improvements in materials science, optics, and power systems that have applications beyond the military sphere. These technological spillovers could have significant impacts on civilian industries and scientific research.

In conclusion, while the path to operational DEWs has been long and costly, the potential payoff appears to justify the investment. As technology continues to advance, we can expect to see more DEW systems deployed in various military contexts. Their development represents not just a new class of weapons, but potentially a paradigm shift in how wars are fought and deterred.

As we stand on the brink of this new era in military technology, the implications for global security and warfare are profound and far-reaching. The successful integration of DEWs into military arsenals could reshape battlefield dynamics, alter strategic calculations, and influence geopolitical relationships. However, realizing the full potential of these weapons will require overcoming significant technical hurdles and addressing complex ethical and legal questions.

War is space is coming. That it has not yet happened is more due to luck than anything else; international pronouncements to the contrary, functional anti-satellite weapons have been long-deployed, although they have not been used in an active conflict to date. In space warfare, mass-to-fuel ratios will be the dominant factors: anything that reduces mass is well worth the developmental expenses. Destructive laser weapons systems, while not yet “ready for primetime“, are almost to the point of active deployment to the battlefield.

The story of directed-energy weapons is still being written, and the coming decades will likely see rapid advancements in this field. As with any transformative military technology, the ultimate impact of DEWs will depend not only on their technical capabilities but also on how they are employed and regulated in the complex landscape of international relations and conflict. The age of energy weapons is upon us, and its effects will resonate far beyond the battlefield.

It is not “war cheerleading” to promote the development of new weapons systems – like it or not, for all of the research on these weapons in the West, there are plenty of other nations which are working just as hard on the same systems, for the same reason.

*The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To*

The Digital Battlefield: The Evolution and Global Impact of Information Warfare

Michael Cessna July 19, 2024

NOTE: As we take this article to press – on Friday, July, 19, 2024 – a major cyber event is developing, affecting Windows OS machines running the CrowdStrike antivirus software. At press time, it remains unclear as to whether this is a simple software glitch, or if it is a deliberate attack.

One of the most popular terms in the military sphere of late is “information warfare” (IW)…but, what is that, really? Simply out, information warfare is the use of information and communication technologies to gain competitive advantages over opponents. In short, it is the use of broad categories of inforamtion gain advantages.

For propaganda centuries, competing states have used various forms of propaganda (well before the term was invented in the 1920’s), it was not until World War One that Edward Bernays developed the first rudimentary principles of what would become the modern fields of psychological operations (psyops), propaganda, and what I term “directed deep-fake operations“.

With the rise to dominance of increased connectivity and a vastly enlarged reliance on digital systems, for everything from simple communications to to critical financial transaction systems, information warfare is now a critical, and growing component of national security. Finding ways to “attrit” such systems, whether via a more stealthy, long-term approach of systems infiltration or through a sudden, all-out assault, is now a major focus of top-tier national armed forces.

Like all of the many areas of warfare, modern information warfare has its unique shapes, spaces and requirements. Information warfare is now far more than creative fake newspapers, propaganda posters and leaflets:

A. Cyberattacks and hacking target critical government and military systems.
B. Disinformation and propaganda are used to spread false or misleading information, specifically targeted to influence public opinion.
C. Social media manipulation uses platforms from Facebook and Instagram, to TikTok and Minds to amplify directed messages of misinformation and fake news in order to create “echo chambers“, which pigeonhole unwary readers into believing a wholly fictional version of reality.
D. Critical to these operations are the use of “deep-fakes” and AI-generated content to create convincing fake videos and audio to mislead or discredit. These videos originally began by digitally grafting the faces of various celebrities onto pornographic videos – because Rule 34 is real – and moved on to spoofing major media and political figures…these tools have only improved in recent years.

There are, of course, many actors involved in making this type of warfare viable. Variously, there are three basic groups actively engaging in these operations: state-sponsored groups deployed by governments to run campaigns designed to influence foreign populations by reshaping their views via mainstream and social media spaces; these also frequently serve to destabilize adversary powers. This is one of the many responsibilities of the Central Intelligence Agency’s “meme division”.

Non-state actors (terrorist groups, “hacktivists”, and other organizations, best lumped together as “anarchists”) use the same information warfare tactics as the state-sponsored groups, but use them for strictly criminal, money-making scams, or as mercenary groups to supplement the state groups in their operations, as has happened in recent years, specifically with Iran’s response to the STUXNET attack of 2010, that seriously damaged Iran’s nuclear material enrichment facility in the city of Natanz.

The main tools being used to facilitate the various operational avenues of attack in information warfare are “bots” and “troll farms”. These vectors employ automated accounts and organized groups spreading content and engaging in online discussions, that are increasingly being driven by ever-improving Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms.

Aside from the social media manipulaton sphere, which is best defined as a “soft attack strategy”, the primary attack modes use viruses and “hostile” AI to target critical infrastructure systems to attempt to disrupt power grids, financial systems, hospital operations, local police and fire response systems, water distribution and treatment systems, and other vital services. This is, in fact, the door that was opened by the STUXNET attacks, because that virus – rather than directly attacking the core programming, specifically targets the programmable logic controllers (PLCs), which allow the automation of electromechanical processes such as those used to directly control machinery and various industrial processes, including gas centrifuges for separating nuclear material, as happened in Iran in 2010.

Globally, various hostile vector systems are used to influence national elections, by attempting to sway voter opinions unnaturally and to undermine electoral processes, although this requires a targetable infrastructure in the target country that allows for manipulation of votes and vote counting through electronic means. Economically, consequences include manipulation of both local and global markets, theft of crucial intellectual property, and significant disruption of business operations, both at the street level, but also the operations of major, “blue chip” companies.

Socially, a dedicated “soft strike” IW campaign can exacerbate even long-dormant divisions within a country and its societies. the exacerbation of existing tensions and/or the creation of new conflicts within populations can have horrifying consequences; Rwanda and the breakup of Yugoslavia, while not directly the result of IW campaigns, come immediately to mind. Information Warfare campaigns often result – intentionally, or not – a serious erosion of trust through declining confidence in media, government institutions, and information sources.

Counter-measures and defensive strategies, to date, are haphazard, with their effects being difficult to measure accurately. Government initiatives, such as the creation of cybersecurity agencies and information warfare units, are themselves frequently seen as suspiciious by those government’s own populations, as are various “media literacy” programs, that seek to educate the public in how to identify and resist disinformation. In this, of course, the governmental responses are fighting against frequently subtle and hard-to-argue points, limiting their effectiveness.

In the private sector, responses such as the development of AI-powered detection tools and enhanced security measures are ongoing. However, these tools and their value remain murky, as the companies deploying them are loathe to talk about them in public, as their very existence depends on those tools remaining secret.

International cooperation through the sharing of intelligence and joint operations to combat threats is also hard to measure, for the simple fact that those measures are also hazy in their effects, at least for the general public, as intelligence agencies and armed forces – for reasons similar to the private sector – are loathe to reveal their operations publicly.

As Information Warfare continues to adapt to new technologies and societal changes, the paramount importance of highly responsive adaptability means that defensive strategies must constantly evolve to meet new threats, in real-time. Global cooperation is needed for nations and corporations to establish norms and combat information warfare effectively. In this, these groups will need to find methods to share their defense strategies…which is a very difficult thing to do for thee groups, even on a good day.

Additional Resources

Edward L. Bernays (1928), Propaganda
James F. Dunnigan (1996), Digital Soldiers

The Era of Hybrid Warfare – Reality Or Buzzword?

Michael Cessna July 11, 2024

All too frequently, people resort to pithy and catchy buzzwords and phrases to disguise the fact that they really have no idea what to say, but have to say something. We’ve all heard examples: “streamline virtual portals”, “strategize cross-media interfacing“, “maximize enterprise users“, etcetera, etcetera, ad nausea. Sadly – we’re way past ‘alarming’ – militaries, especially in the West, are no different.

For military forces in most parts of the world, sounding trendy is necessary to keep money flowing from their civilian leadership. Thus, at budget time, military leaders tend to appear in front of civilian bureaucrats – most of whom know absolutely nothing practical about anything ‘military’ – with new and scarily indefinable concepts to keep the money spigot turned on. In this, while the military generals and colonels are technically lying, they are doing so because whatever threats their nation may be facing, those threats are not changing very much or very quickly (mostly), but politicians live to be “ahead of the game”, and tossing out buzzwords on the Sunday morning talk show circuit to show how up-to-date they are. And don’t be fooled: the politicians the generals hate the most are not civilians, but those military veterans who go into politics, because they are far less susceptible to Buzzword Bingo.

But, I digress.

Of late, one of the major buzz-terms has been “Hybrid Warfare”. Sounds concerning, right? But what is “hybrid warfare”, exactly? The official NATO definition is, itself, loaded with buzz terms. Simply out, “hybrid warfare” is the combination of “conventional warfare” (i.e., the current war in Ukraine) with all the other stuff: guerrilla warfare, psychological operations and propaganda, “information warfare” (itself, a buzzword), low-level drone warfare, and on and on…essentially, the combination of all the means of waging war, if deployed all at once or even in pieces, is “hybrid warfare”. If this sounds familiar, that’s because it is: this term perfectly describes everything from World War Two to the US and French wars with Vietnam, to Desert Shield/Desert Storm and the recent “GWOT” (Global War On Terror).

*USAF aircraft of the 4th Fighter Wing (F-16, F-15C and F-15E) fly over Kuwaiti oil fires, set by the retreating Iraqi army during Operation Desert Storm in 1991. US Air Force photo. Public Domain.*

The reason this is particular buzzword is relevant, however, is because – as was pointed out in 1940 – effective combat technology has migrated down to the level of the common citizen. Knowledge is like that: if you know how to do a thing, getting the tools and materials is not overly difficult…as Western forces have discovered to their regret over the last quarter-century or so: if you’re wondering why the recent series of wars have been inconclusive, this is one of the main reasons.

Key Components of Hybrid Warfare

The basic components of hybrid warfare can be defined by the following:

Conventional military operations

Traditional military force deployments, and/or shows of military strength have formed the basis of recorded warfare throughout history. When the average person thinks of “war“, this is what they think of: serried ranks of troops in uniform, gobs of artillery and armored vehicles, big, fast-moving jets, and all the other “stuff”.

*Warfare. Collage – various sources, public domain.*

Irregular warfare and insurgency

The use of proxies and non-state actors on a regular basis is a relatively new phenomenon, at least when done with any degree of reasoned planning and execution. Arming rebels, insurgents and guerrillas – or jihadist’s – has been done forever and a day, but today, in the glare of news cameras hungry for bloody story meat, the practice is frequently regularized, and given a sheen of legitimacy…whether it is competently done or not.

Another buzzword feature associated with this idea is that of “asymmetric warfare“. This is a “weasel term“, as it essentially means anything the enemy does that seems irrational, but that works in a combat environment. This can be anything from tunneling under perimeter of a “forward operating base” (FOB), to adding peanut oil to conventional engines, something the British SOE and the American OSS did in Europe during WW2.

Military establishments and their (mostly) civilian masters have come to depend absolutely on computer technologies, including the internet. As a result, cyber attacks and information warfare are now serious problems.

Hacking and disruption of critical infrastructure – who remembers the STUXNET virus? – demonstrated both the terrifying levels of damage that a simple computer virus could wreak on highly dangerous manufacturing processes, but also the equally terrifying scale of the potential response.

In like manner, “disinformation” campaigns and social media manipulation, once laughed at by many people, have proven to be an important component on the new battlefield. The ‘edgy’ memes shared over social media, however, are the equivalent to the paper pamphlets of past decades, the crucial difference being that this kind of media can reach a far wider audience, and do so far faster than conventional radio or television spots. For all that, however, the main impact of disinformation campaigns has actually been to undermine the public perception of government in general, as governing bodies around the world – peopled by many who lack any real understanding of technology – desperately try to restrict both free speech as well as social media access, to the extent of developing “caged” social media platforms which they then restrict their citizens to using exclusively, on penalty of arrest. The end result is a rapidly growing distrust of all forms of government.

Economic pressure and sanctions

Likewise, the old standbys of economic pressure and trade sanctions are beginning to fail, because there is too much money to be made getting around the sanctions. Even targeted economic measures against key sectors within a hostile state can be overcome, if that state either has friendly economic partners willing to either openly ignore the sanctions, or at least are willing to turn a blind eye to the smuggling.

Cases in point, both Russia and Iran, while both suffering economic hardships initially, have both rebounded quickly, to the point that Rosoboronexport – Russia’s state arms dealer – is working three shifts to produce mountains of military vehicles, equipment and ammunition to supply not only the war in Ukraine, but to fulfill export orders to multiple countries (unlike the West), leaving the failures of the West’s total lack of strategic vision laid bare. The brutal government of Iran, too – like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq – is doing perfectly well for itself; the welfare of their citizenry is irrelevant, as long as they can limit access to news, and can keep the populace at work.

Communist China, with an economy on life support and teetering on the brink of collapse, has been desperately trying to build an international infrastructure based on their “Belt & Road Initiative” to gain enough clout to create exploitable economic dependencies…which, if the collapse of French dominance in the Sahel region of Africa is indication, is a whole different kind of losing strategy.

Conclusion

The challenges for National Defense in responding to “total warfare“, or “unrestricted warfare” are vast. Far aside from the legal and ethical considerations, are the strains placed on both traditional military and governmental structures, and – most critically – the increasingly negative perception of those institutions, as they flail helplessly, deploying tools and strategies that they do not understand.

And of course, lurking in the background lay the twin threats of A.I. and biotech. As the capabilities of AI increase rapidly, deploying a hostile AI against an “enemy” populace, while likely to be very effective, can easily backfire, sparking a whole host of “science fiction”-like scenarios none of them good.

Far more worrying, is the possibility of very high-tech biological warfare. Conspiracy theories about the recent coronavirus pandemic aside, the potential certainly exists for the truly deranged to deploy a “slate-wiper” virus that they believe will kill just enough people to let them achieve their goals…the problem being, of course, that viruses have a nasty habit of rapidly mutating, rendering vaccines and inoculations against them completely ineffective.

This is not a case of “give peace a chance” – throughout history, there are plenty of madmen, and equally mad states – who take “soft” attitudes as an opportunity to strike.

We can’t tell you what is going to happen. All we can do is try to warn you.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

David Kilcullen (2011), The Accidental Guerrilla
Qiao Liang, Wang Xiangsui (2015),Unrestricted Warfare
Thomas Ricks (2012), The Generals
James F. Dunnigan (2003), How To Make War, 4^th Edition
James F. Dunnigan (1991), Shooting Blanks

The Quiet Revolution You Should Fear

Michael Cessna July 3, 2024

In the shadows of Silicon Valley, artificial intelligence is quickly reshaping the battlefield, providing a glimpse of a future where wars may be won or lost in milliseconds by algorithms we can barely comprehend. As AI seeps into military strategy, we face the prospect of a new era in warfare — one where the line between human intuition and machine calculation blurs, and a single line of code could spark the next global conflict.

As we witness the disaster that is the is the “Gaza Pier“, driven by the ongoing “Corporate BS Bingo” that replaced decades of actual training and planning, it’s easy to miss new developments, especially with contentious elections at hone, and ground-shaking political shifts overseas.

“Artificial Intelligence” (AI) systems are revolutionizing the military decision-making processes through their ability to rapidly process, analyze, and collate vast amounts of data, far faster than even teams of trained and experienced humans can do. These developing capabilities have several key implications for military strategy, and thus, national security strategies.

The first factor is enhanced situational awareness: AI can integrate data from multiple sources (satellites, drones, ground sensors, etc.) in real-time, at speeds faster than conventional processes. It also provides commanders with a more comprehensive and up-to-date battlefield picture, helping to identify patterns and anomalies that human analysts might miss.

AI can cycle through predictive analysis at high speed, to better forecast enemy movements, and possible intentions, based on historical data and current intelligence information as it comes in. Clearly, this aids in proactive strategy development rather than reactive responses, helping to predict potential geopolitical events and conflicts before they escalate, at levels down to the division level of command, or even lower.

Artificial Intelligence is able to quickly analyze multiple scenarios to determine optimal resource allocation, improving resource optimization, aiding efficiency in troop deployment, equipment distribution, and supply chain management. These points are not insignificant, as they form the critical underpinnings of military operations.

In addition, faster decision cycles, despite the increased potential for errors, allow AI-assisted analysis to significantly reduce the time needed to make strategic decisions. This potential increase in accuracy and speed would prove crucial in fast moving, rapidly developing conflict situations.

These advantages are not without risks, however. The risk of over-reliance on AI recommendations, without human oversight, is a serious ethical issue. This is best demonstrated by the deployment of the STM Kargu, a completely autonomous drone that uses facial recognition technology to identify specific individuals for targeted assassination, without input from a human operator. These drones, according to the United Nations, Turkey executed exactly this type of attack in 2020.

There is a distinct need for some sort of protocol to explain to AI how to understand the reasoning behind strategic suggestions. As well, “friendly” AI needs to be trained to recognize deception tactics, especially those that may come from “adversarial AI”, attempting to manipulate a friendly AI’s decision-making systems and processes.

In that regard, the integration of AI in cyber security and information warfare is transforming both offensive and defensive capabilities, first through enhanced cyber defenses. As in the wider civilian sphere, AI systems can monitor networks in real-time, detecting and respond to threats faster than human operators. Machine learning algorithms can identify new types of cyber attacks by recognizing potential attack patterns. Automated, independent patch management and vulnerability assessment tools, also powered by AI, can enable these systems to aid in their own defense.

Also in that regard, AI-powered cyber attacks are another aspect of this developing realm. The development of more sophisticated and adaptive malware, intended for deployment by AI, can discover and exploit vulnerabilities in target networks more efficiently than manual searching. This holds the potential for AI to coordinate large-scale, multi-vector attacks on hostile cyber networks.

In the realm of information warfare and disinformation, AI has already developed tools for creating and disseminating very convincing fake news and propaganda. Such psychological operations formerly required a massive investment in conventional printing and radio technology, with results that were frequently uneven in performance. The use of natural language processing to analyze and target specific population demographics with tailored disinformation can reshape both civilian and troop viewpoints in near-real time.

AI-generated realistic video and audio, as a result, will soon prove crucial for military deception operations, through challenges in verifying the authenticity of intelligence gathered from open sources, as well as via recovered intelligence report. Development of AI tools to detect deepfakes and other manipulated media is a major aspect of ongoing AI combat developments.

The reason for this kind of focus, as indicated above, lies in the realm of social media manipulation. AI bots capable of influencing public opinion and sowing discord in target populations can potentially undermine a hostile nation’s national strategy – and potentially its active combat operations – by using AI to identify key social influencers and vulnerable groups for targeted messaging, deep fake video and audio, presenting a distorted perspective to a hostile nation or support group’s population.

But, AI systems can also be used to detect and counter enemy disinformation campaigns, including those conducted by hostile AI’s. The key feature in these types of operations lies in the speed of detection, and in effective countermeasures, as soon as those types of subtle attacks are detected.

In more conventional situations, quantum computing and cryptography hold the potential for quantum-capable AI systems to rapidly break current encryption methods. This is a serious problem, one of extreme concern, as AI holds the potential to crack the “holy grail” of cryptography, by possibly finding a shortcut to breaking the “one-time pad” (OTP) encryption protocol which, despite its faults, is still the most secure system for securing classified transmissions.

*An example of a one-time pad. Image credit: Mysid, 2007. Public Domain.*

Related to this, is the development of AI management for quantum-resistant cryptography, to protect sensitive military communications. In signals intelligence (SIGINT), advanced AI systems for intercepting and decrypting enemy communications can use natural language processing for real-time translation and analysis of intercepted messages.

This list, quite literally, can go on for miles.

The expansion of artificial intelligence into the military sphere is not something to be hand-waved off as a passing fad. Like all developments in military technology, there are both design and deployment cycles, but also countermeasures that can be discovered and implemented.

The Chinese have a saying: “May you live in interesting times.”

That is not a positive…not least, because we do, in fact, live in interesting times.

Act accordingly.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Paul Scharre (2023), Four Battlegrounds: Power in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Sam J Tangredi (USN, Ret.), George Galdorisi (2021), AI at War
Denise Garcia (2024), The AI Military Race
Thomas Ricks (2012), The Generals
James F. Dunnigan (2003), How To Make War, 4^th Edition
James F. Dunnigan (1991), Shooting Blanks

The Chest Rig – The Real Military Revolution

Michael Cessna June 7, 2024

Some things, people don’t really think too much about. Even when people see pictures of it, they don’t really think about, much, unless it is specifically referenced. This week, we’re going to look at one of those things.

Soldiers carry stuff; sometimes, a lot of stuff. That is fairly well understood by most people, but for most, the idea of carrying this around centers on a backpack, purse or some other type of satchel. Armies around the world have had to deal with this problem for millennia. For the most part, armies before roughly the 1890’s had variations of a single solution: the baldric.

A baldric is simply a wide and heavy leather strap that goes over one shoulder, and holds something over the opposite hip, much like a lady’s purse, or a modern “messenger bag”. From the 17^th to the 19^th centuries, most European armies used a pair of baldrics to carry a cartridge box on one side, and a bayonet on the other; occasionally, some type of “haversack” was slung next to the bayonet. Anything heavier typically went into either a rather primitive (by modern standards) backpack, or onto wagons or pack animals. As long as soldiers used simple muzzleloading muskets, this was sufficient for most campaigns.

*Watercolor depicting the uniform of the Continental Army’s 2nd Canadian Regiment. Painting by Charles M. Lefferts, 1926. Public Domain.*

However, as small arms technology dramatically advanced in the late 19^th century, new methods of carrying weapons were needed.

The problem was not simply new “bits-n-bobs”, but increasing weight. Weight is the bane of any soldier’s existence. Carrying heavy loads – frequently exceeding 120lbs/54kg – beats down any person quickly, and in a time where motorized transport was not an option, this could halt an army faster than any destroyed bridge.

*American soldiers arriving at Schiphol Airport, North Holland, during the NATO exercise “Reforger”, 1978. Photo Credit: Rob Croes. Dutch National Archives. CC0/1.0*

The solution, at first, was to connect a belt to suspenders. This distributed the weight between the waist and shoulders, and proved to be a great help in load carrying. This lasted into the 21^st century, best known as “ALICE Gear” (All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment).

*Basic ALICE rig. United States Army, FM 21-16, Care and Use of Individual Clothing and Equipment, 1972. US Army. Public Domain.*

The ALICE system, and its foreign copies, was an excellent and highly customizable way to carry equipment, opening up the ability to carry more tools into combat (because there is no rest of the weary). But then, something new began to appear in combat zones.

*Degar/Montagnard troops with U.S. Army soldiers during the Vietnam War. US Army Photo. Public Domain.*

In the mid-1950’s, Communist China decided that it needed a load-carrying system for its troops, adapted to their adoption of the Russian SKS rifle. Since the SKS uses fixed, 10-round strip-clips, the Chinese created a bandolier that could hold some 200 rounds, along with a small bottle of cleaning oil.

*Vietcong Exhibit, Fort Lewis Military Museum, Fort Lewis, Washington, USA, 2009. SKS bandolier is on the mannequin, on the right. Photo by Joe Mabel. CCA/3.0*

While this was fine for the SKS, the Chinese quickly adopted their homegrown variant of the Russian AK-47 right after adopting the SKS. Since AK-type weapons all use a very prominent curved magazine, this required a completely new type of carrying equipment.

The result was the Type 56 Carrier (the first “Chest Rig”).

*Chinese Type 56 Chest Rig (circled in red). Unknown Author.*

Like the SKS bandoleer before it, the Type 56 Carrier fit over the front part of the body, but was completely off the waist, using its shoulder straps to carry all the weight. Will not at all modular (as that was not really a concern for any military forces at the time), it was a simple, easy to produce design that got the job done.

The Type 56 Carrier design swiftly began to spread around the world. It’s simplicity and ease of manufacture allowed it to be copied in small “guerrilla” manufacturing shops, giving small armies, as well as insurgent/guerrilla forces a huge advantage, bring them into the same equipment capability range as regular armies. In the United States, at least, new chest rigs developed from the Type 56 can be bought for as little as $36. As well, the chest rig design is highly adaptable, allowing for the carrying of hand grenades, radios and all sorts of other gear.

*Chicom Chest Rigs of the Soviet Afghan War, c.1989. CCA/3.0*

But there are added benefits to the design that other load-carrying systems cannot match: vehicles.

More conventional, ALICE-type harnesses can be problematic when the wearer tries to enter a vehicle, as the various pouches on the harnesses belt do not fit well with most vehicle seats. In fact, fully loaded pouches can be downright painful when sitting in most car seats.

In contrast, the chest rig allows the wearer a much more comfortable rid. An additional distinct benefit for the chest rig in a vehicle is the ability to reload a weapon easily; more conventional rigs to not lend themselves to this ability.

Chest rigs are certainly not without the issues: “hitting the deck” (i.e., getting as flat onto the ground as possible) is much harder in a chest rig than in a more conventional harness. At the troop level, however, troops find ways to compensate – training is, after all, more important than the tools themselves: you learn to train with what you have, not with what you might want.

So.

Why an article on something most people don’t give much thought to? Simply put, weapons are very, very good things to have. But, to make the best use of those weapons, a person needs to learn to use other tools to utilize those weapons to their fullest potential – when you look at pictures of troops, don’t “just” look at their weapons, look at what they are wearing, to carry all the other gear that they need.

It is said that you “fight as your train”. That is driven not just by the weapons you carry but by the gear you need to make those weapons work to their potential.

You never know when that might become necessary knowledge.

Forewarned is forearmed.

Microsoft Hires AI-Hater to Work in AI Department

Paul Collier March 21, 2024

Mustafa Suleyman, an AI Pioneer who warned the world that AI will cause a human “catastrophe on an unimaginable scale,” has been selected by Microsoft to serve at a high level in its AI Department. Suleyman is the co-founder of DeepMind, a Google-owned research lab.

Microsoft hires expert who warned AI could cause ‘catastrophe on an unimaginable scale’ – nypost.com

Excerpt:

Microsoft hired renowned artificial intelligence pioneer Mustafa Suleyman – the co-founder of the Google-owned DeepMind research lab who has warned the emerging technology could a “catastrophe on an unimaginable scale.”

Suleyman, 39, will report directly to Microsoft boss Satya Nadella and will run the company’s consumer AI division, the company said. He will lead Microsoft’s efforts to build out its Copilot AI chatbot and to integrate AI features into the Bing search engine and Edge browser.

… The hiring was seen as a major coup for Microsoft as it looks to beat chief rival Google and others in the race to develop advanced AI. Microsoft is a chief investor in OpenAI, the firm best known for creating the ChatGPT chatbot and the Sora text-to-video generation tool.

However, Suleyman has repeatedly urged caution and the need for safe development of AI.

In his 2023 book “The Coming Wave,” Suleyman argued that AI, synthetic biology and other burgeoning technologies could allow “a diverse array of bad actors to unleash disruption, instability, and even catastrophe on an unimaginable scale.”

Read Full Article

Federal Judge Protects OpenAI from Sarah Silverman… in Part

Paul Collier March 20, 2024

In a landmark case that could go a long way towards defining what type of copyrighted material AI tools can use to train themselves, Federal Judge Araceli Martinez-Olgiun just handed a big win to AI developers, striking down most of the complaints lobbied against OpenAI by Sarah Silverman and other content creators.

In her ruling, the judge claimed the authors “fail to explain what the outputs entail or allege that any particular output is substantially similar – or similar at all – to their books.”

Excerpt from www.mycouriertribune.com

… Martinez-Olguin dismissed one of the major claims that the authors had made: that all the answers ChatGPT generates are infringing work made of information obtained through copyright violation. Basically, everything ChatGPT creates violates the rights of the copyright holders of the works the company used to train its AI system.

Last year, Sarah Silverman, backed by authors like Michael Chabon and Ta-Nehisi Coates, sued Artificial Intelligence firm OpenAI. Last month, the presiding judge dismissed the claims of negligence, unjust enrichment, Digital Millennium Copyright Act violations, and vicarious copyright infringement. The authors were given until March 13 to amend their complaint and return to court. At the time of this writing, no public report has revealed whether or not they did so.

This is the second case of copyright infringement by writers against artificial intelligence that courts have partially dismissed. Last November, Judge Vince Chhabria also dismissed portions of Sarah Silverman’s allegations against Meta.

World’s Most Efficient Solar Cell Created

Paul Collier March 19, 2024

Researchers from the National University of Singapore claim to have created the world’s most efficient solar cell, which registered a power conversion efficiency of 27.1%, a new world record. The researchers created what is called a triple-junction perovskite/Si tandem solar cell.

“Remarkably, after 15 years of ongoing research in the field of perovskite-based solar cells, this work constitutes the first experimental evidence for the inclusion of cyanate into perovskites to boost the stability of its structure and improve power conversion efficiency,” says Assistant Professor Hou Yi, a lead researcher on the team.

Spy Satellite Network Being Built by Musk’s SpaceX

Paul Collier March 19, 2024

Elon Musk’s SpaceX is apparently building a network of spy satellites for an American intelligence agency according to a report run by Reuters. In the report, Reuters cites unnamed sources within the U.S. intelligence community who are making the claim Musk’s SpaceX is building the spy satellite network.

While Musk’s company, SpaceX, builds surveillance equipment for the U.S. government, his social media company, X, continues to create a brand narrative that seems opposed to the very kind of powers his other company is enabling. In response to the rumors, the National Reconnaissance office told Reuters they are developing “the most capable, diverse, and resilient space-based intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance system the world has ever seen.”

EU Passes World’s First Comprehensive AI Rules

Paul Collier March 18, 2024

The EU has passed its AI act, becoming the first attempt by any major government to develop comprehensive regulations for the development and deployment of artificial intelligence (AI). The regulations are scheduled to take effect at the end of May of this year. The details of the bill are still being sifted through as tech companies scramble to understand the regulations and adjust their business models accordingly.

Excerpt from cnbc

The European Union’s parliament on Wednesday approved the world’s first major set of regulatory ground rules to govern the mediatized artificial intelligence at the forefront of tech investment.
Born in 2021, the EU AI Act divides the technology into categories of risk, ranging from “unacceptable” — which would see the technology banned — to high, medium and low hazard.
The regulation is expected to enter into force at the end of the legislature in May, after passing final checks and receiving endorsement from the European Council.
The European Union’s parliament on Wednesday approved the world’s first major set of regulatory ground rules to govern the mediatized artificial intelligence at the forefront of tech investment.The EU brokered provisional political consensus in early December, and it was then endorsed in the Parliament’s Wednesday session, with 523 votes in favor, 46 against and 49 votes not cast.“Europe is NOW a global standard-setter in AI,” Thierry Breton, the European commissioner for internal market, wrote on X.
The president of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, described the act as trailblazing, saying it would enable innovation, while safeguarding fundamental rights.

“Artificial intelligence is already very much part of our daily lives. Now, it will be part of our legislation too,” she wrote in a social media post.

Dragos Tudorache, a lawmaker who oversaw EU negotiations on the agreement, hailed the deal, but noted the biggest hurdle remains implementation.

Directed-Energy Weapons (DEWs): The Future of Warfare?

The Digital Battlefield: The Evolution and Global Impact of Information Warfare

NOTE: As we take this article to press – on Friday, July, 19, 2024 – a major cyber event is developing, affecting Windows OS machines running the CrowdStrike antivirus software. At press time, it remains unclear as to whether this is a simple software glitch, or if it is a deliberate attack.

Additional Resources

The Era of Hybrid Warfare – Reality Or Buzzword?

Key Components of Hybrid Warfare

Conclusion

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

The Quiet Revolution You Should Fear

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

The Chest Rig – The Real Military Revolution

Microsoft Hires AI-Hater to Work in AI Department

Federal Judge Protects OpenAI from Sarah Silverman… in Part

World’s Most Efficient Solar Cell Created

Spy Satellite Network Being Built by Musk’s SpaceX

EU Passes World’s First Comprehensive AI Rules

You may have missed

The M60 Tank’s Surprising Second Act

The Emperor Who Quit

Iran: The Superpower the U.S. Built — and Couldn’t Control

Israel’s Recognition of Somaliland May Have Just Killed the Post-War World Order…

NOTE: As we take this article to press – on Friday, July, 19, 2024 – a major cyber event is developing, affecting Windows OS machines running the CrowdStrike antivirus software. At press time, it remains unclear as to whether this is a simple software glitch, or if it is a deliberate attack.

Additional Resources

Key Components of Hybrid Warfare

Conclusion

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

You may have missed

Back FREEDOM for only $4.95/month and help the Freedomist to fight the ongoing war on liberty and defeat the establishment's SHILL press!!