The Pentagon’s endless struggle with AI

From: POLITICO's Digital Future Daily - Tuesday Jun 27,2023 08:02 pm
How the next wave of technology is upending the global economy and its power structures
Jun 27, 2023 View in browser
 
POLITICO's Digital Future Daily newsletter logo

By Mohar Chatterjee

With help from Derek Robertson

Joe Manchin stands behind desk holding a paper.

At a Senate Armed Services hearing in April, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said AI “changes the game” of war altogether. | Francis Chung/POLITICO

War is changing fast. And that dizzying pace extends to the world of military tech, as POLITICO’s Mohar Chatterjee reported in detail for a story today exploring how the Department of Defense is struggling to bolster its AI capabilities and keep up with the likes of Russia and China. Read the full story here, and an excerpt below.

Russia’s use of military drones in Ukraine has grown so aggressive that manufacturers have struggled to keep up. China’s strategy for a “world-class military” features cutting-edge artificial intelligence, according to Xi Jinping’s major party address last year.

The Pentagon, meanwhile, has struggled through a series of programs to boost its high-tech powers in recent years.

Now Congress is trying to put new pressure on the military, through bills and provisions in the coming National Defense Authorization Act, to get smarter, faster, about cutting-edge technology.

Defense pundits widely believe the future competitiveness of the U.S. military depends on how quickly it can purchase and field AI and other cutting-edge software to improve intelligence gathering, autonomous weapons, surveillance platforms and robotic vehicles. Without it, rivals could cut into American dominance. And Congress agrees: At a Senate Armed Services hearing in April, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) said AI “changes the game” of war altogether.

But the military’s own requirements for purchasing and contracting have trapped it in a much slower-moving process geared to more traditional hardware.

To make sure the Pentagon is keeping pace with its adversaries, Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) introduced a bill this month to analyze how the U.S. is faring on key technologies like AI relative to the competition.

The 2024 NDAA, currently being negotiated in Congress, includes several provisions that target AI specifically, including generative AI for information warfare, new autonomous systems and better training for an AI-driven future.

Other members of Congress have started to express their concerns publicly: Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, told Politico that the military had fallen “way behind” on AI and that military chiefs had received “no guidance.”

Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, called Gen. Mark Milley, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in March, looking for answers on whether the DOD was adapting to the “changing nature of war.” In response, Milley said the military was in a “transition period” and acknowledged it urgently needed to adapt to the new demands of warfare.

As AI has quickly become more sophisticated, its potential uses in warfare have grown. Today, concrete uses for AI in defense range from piloting unmanned fighter jets to serving up tactical suggestions for military leaders based on real-time data from the battlefield. But it still amounts to just a tiny fraction of defense investment. This year the Pentagon requested $1.8 billion to research, develop, test and evaluate artificial intelligence — a record, but still just a small fraction of the nearly $900 billion defense budget. Separately, the Pentagon asked for $1.4 billion for a project to centralize data from all the military’s AI-enabled technologies and sensors into a single network.

For years, the Pentagon has struggled to adapt quickly to not just AI, but any new digital technology. Many of these new platforms and tools, particularly software, are developed by small, fast-moving startup companies that haven’t traditionally done business with the Pentagon. And the technology itself changes faster than the military can adapt its internal systems for buying and testing new products.

A particular challenge is generative AI, the fast-moving new platforms that communicate and reason like humans, and are growing in power almost month-to-month.

To get up to speed on generative AI, the Senate version of the 2024 NDAA would create a prize competition to detect and tag content produced by generative AI, a key DOD concern because of the potential for AI to generate misleading but convincing deep fakes. It also directs the Pentagon to develop AI tools to monitor and assess information campaigns, which could help the military track disinformation networks and better understand how information spreads in a population.

And in a more traditional use of AI for defense, the Senate wants to invest in R&D to counter unmanned aircraft systems.

Another proposed solution to rev up the Pentagon’s AI development pipeline is an entirely new office dedicated to autonomous systems. That’s the idea being pushed by Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.), vice chair of the House Armed Services Committee, who co-sponsored a bill to set up a new Joint Autonomy Office that would serve all the military branches. (It would operate within an existing central office of the Pentagon called the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office, or CDAO.)

The JAO would focus on the development, testing and delivery of the military’s biggest autonomy projects. Some are already under development, like a semi-autonomous tank and an unmanned combat aircraft, but are being managed in silos rather than in a coordinated way.

The House version of the 2024 NDAA contains some provisions like an analysis of human-machine interface technologies that would set the stage for Wittman’s proposed office, which would be the first to specifically target autonomous systems, including weaponry. Such systems have become a bigger part of the Pentagon’s future defense strategy, driven in part by the success of experimental killer drones and AI signal-jamming in the Ukraine war.

Read about the DoD’s previous efforts and more here.

 

LISTEN TO POLITICO'S ENERGY PODCAST: Check out our daily five-minute brief on the latest energy and environmental politics and policy news. Don't miss out on the must-know stories, candid insights, and analysis from POLITICO's energy team. Listen today.

 
 
the ai risk scorecard

Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, speaks.

Samuel Altman, CEO of OpenAI, testifies during a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law oversight hearing to examine artificial intelligence, on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on May 16, 2023. Altman testified that regulating artificial intelligence was essential, after his chatbot stunned the world. "We think that regulatory intervention by governments will be critical to mitigate the risks of increasingly powerful models," Altman said. (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / AFP) (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images) | Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

Having trouble keeping track of what AI leaders think about the whole “civilizational risk” thing?

The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers’ magazine, Spectrum, has compiled a handy scorecard breaking down in simple terms where figures like OpenAI’s Sam Altman and Oxford professor Nick Bostrum fall on the spectrum of AI doomerism. They use a few simple heuristics like “Is the success of GPT-4 and today’s other large language models a sign that an [artificial general intelligence] is likely?”, and “Is an AGI likely to cause civilizational disaster if we do nothing?” It includes some telling signature quotes like:

We can imagine other futures, but to do so, we have to maintain independence from the narrative being pushed by those who believe that ‘AGI’ is desirable and that LLMs are the path to it.” — AGI skeptic and University of Washington professor Emily M. Bender.

Variations of these A.I.s may soon develop a conception of self as persisting through time, reflect on desires, and socially interact and form relationships with humans.” — Bostrom, one of the earliest public figures concerned about AI’s “existential” risk.

Why do we need to create these? What are the collateral consequences of deploying these models in contexts where they’re going to be informing people’s decisions?” — Signal Foundation President Meredith Whittaker. — Derek Robertson

crickets on crypto tax

Ever since Congress approved rules back in 2021 to make it easier for the IRS to track digital currencies, the industry has been preparing for a crackdown.

It hasn’t come. That’s what POLITICO’s Brian Faler reported yesterday, as Washington scratches its collective head over radio silence from the Biden administration on what the actual, nitty-gritty requirements for crypto reporting will be.

“This is the single easiest thing they can do to improve compliance, and they’re not doing it,” said Lisa Zarlenga, a former Treasury tax official and now cryptocurrency tax expert at the law firm Steptoe & Johnson.

A Treasury spokesperson said the department is “working diligently to finalize these important and complicated regulations.” Meanwhile the industry continues to chug along apace, to the chagrin of crypto critics on the Hill: “The SEC has proved they’re not afraid of the crypto bros, I know you’re not afraid of the crypto bros, I hope the IRS is not afraid of them — when are we going to see these regulations?” asked Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.). — Derek Robertson

Tweet of the Day

AGI is going to Live, Laugh, Love

the future in 5 links

Stay in touch with the whole team: Ben Schreckinger (bschreckinger@politico.com); Derek Robertson (drobertson@politico.com); Mohar Chatterjee (mchatterjee@politico.com); and Steve Heuser (sheuser@politico.com). Follow us @DigitalFuture on Twitter.

If you’ve had this newsletter forwarded to you, you can sign up and read our mission statement at the links provided.

 

SUBSCRIBE TO POWER SWITCH: The energy landscape is profoundly transforming. Power Switch is a daily newsletter that unlocks the most important stories driving the energy sector and the political forces shaping critical decisions about your energy future, from production to storage, distribution to consumption. Don’t miss out on Power Switch, your guide to the politics of energy transformation in America and around the world. SUBSCRIBE TODAY.

 
 
 

Follow us on Twitter

Ben Schreckinger @SchreckReports

Derek Robertson @afternoondelete

Steve Heuser @sfheuser

 

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Instagram Listen on Apple Podcast
 

To change your alert settings, please log in at https://www.politico.com/_login?base=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com/settings

This email was sent to by: POLITICO, LLC 1000 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA, 22209, USA

Please click here and follow the steps to .

More emails from POLITICO's Digital Future Daily

Jun 26,2023 08:52 pm - Monday

China's move to control the blockchain

Jun 23,2023 08:02 pm - Friday

5 questions for Andrew Yang

Jun 22,2023 08:02 pm - Thursday

Social media's fragmented future

Jun 20,2023 08:26 pm - Tuesday

AI meets the other AI

Jun 16,2023 08:02 pm - Friday

5 questions for Rep. Lori Trahan

Jun 15,2023 08:04 pm - Thursday

The global summit to solve the future