To the editor:
“Man-in-the-loop” is almost no longer viable in war (small local ones and major ones). The speed and volume of information that systems generate can not longer be analyzed by humans in a timely fashion.
Up until now, military leaders have used the “BLUF” principal: the bottom line up front. This can not work anymore. The same way the statement, “The average American family has 2.34 children” is of no use, so, too, metadata cannot be used in future war on tactical or strategic levels during intense, lightning-fast war. Till now “we” (humans) have always been the final decision makers as to if a Reaper drone fires a weapon or a Uran-9 destroys a squad. But humans are just not fast enough anymore and cannot process the voluminous data piles.
A simple one-hour-long night autonomous machine mission in the Adirondack woods to gather basic terrain map-able data would require two full months of full-time work to analyze. So a computer has to be built and programmed to analyze the machine’s output. I have to ASSUME the analyzer is not flawed. What if there is a bug or defect in either system? False positives? False negatives? How will I know with absolute certainty? Thus, to a certain extent, there is a loss of control over the process.
People, humans, do not have the speed or bandwidth to process battlefield information at battlefield speeds. Thus we are leaving much to “automation.” All nations, to degrees, are being forced to move to a “Colossus/Guardian” model simply to keep up with what every other nation is doing (the same thing).
This is dangerous, in my opinion. We are in a rush, focusing on IF we can do it not SHOULD we be doing it. Rest assured, “Skynet” will never become “self-aware”; that is just Hollywood nonsense. But the integrated systems coming on line can outrun us, outthink us and outsmart us. If there should be a defect (intentional or deliberate), we will be in a pickle. So, effectively, it can have the same potential result.
“AI” (or neural nets, as we called them in the early 1990s) is a TOOL that can be used but, like a firearm, has to be checked. They must have safeties and be handled with care — and right now no one is dealing with the potential untold consequences of no checks and balances. The bar has been lowered just as “Kiddie Scripts” emerged decades ago, but the stakes are orders of magnitude greater now.
I don’t think the genie can be put back in the bottle; there is no will to do it in any nation. But at least let’s start addressing the consequences of worst-case scenario.
You’re worried about the oceans rising? Wait till you see what’s coming in the next five years. My profound hope is I am totally wrong and that my fears never come to pass. Nothing will make happier than for someone to show me this opinion when I am 80 and say, “See? You were just a worry wart.”
Ira Weinberg
Saranac Lake