The Operational Environment and the Changing Character of Future Warfare

  • I like the content and format of this paper for the most part, although it tends to get a little long in terms of presenting the content in an explopitable manner. I would like to porvide some feedback in genral terms for your consideration.

    Although it may possibly fall outside the scope of your paper which seems to focus on force on force operations, I would include the potential for conflict beyond the Flashpoints and Fault Lines on pg 6.  The future will be contested in multiple dimensions, not purely military or political. I see the potential for mega-city failure as perhaps more strategically significant/prominent than state failure, and more aligned with national interests than many of the conflics we are presently pursuing.  Further, there are other potentials for surprise conflict due to: climate change, water scarcity, famine, and global pandemic which could all result in mass migration and increased friction and conflict throughout teh world, but impacting all nations and thier interests.

    The era of contested equality could also be identified as the augmented age; a time when people, objects, systems, even software have augmented capabilities.

    The description of convergence aligns with Adm Cebrowski's (the net centric warfare originator) premise of third stage technologies (first stage is invention based on need eg. Navigation, second on improvements eg. GPS, third on synergistic interactions and novel applications eg. precision farming, precision weapons, dynamic bridge/building motion dampening supports etc) - the emergence of new and disruptive capabilities. The third stage does not rely on R&D but instead on creativity, invention, experimentation, discovery and entrepreneurism.  In this regard then, I foresee significant disruptions from:

    - software defined 'anything': software capabilities are in parallel with Moore's Law but lag the computing and memory innovations by a couple of generations.  This gap is closing and software capabilities are increasing exponentially - the potential will be disruptive.

    - ubiquitous super-computing: what are the implications of five year olds playing and growing up with such powerful capabilities?  Your paper states "nearly every person on Earth has access to a connected, mobile device" - what if that device was a supercomputer with AI?

    - voice-in/voice-out computing (including digital assistants): even the illiterate have the ability to communicate, interact and learn.  Imagine a future where anyone in the world has the ability to do or try anything, learn anything, make anything - completely unrestricted by levels of education, income, location or status.  (Google offers their AI engine to anyone for download and creative application development).

    - ubiquitous sensing: the ability to find, identify, track, and engage through individual and collaborative/collective efforts

    - hyperspecialization on-demand: crowdsourced and funded specialised abilities available to anyone, many free or via micropayments.

    - Graphene: the ability to mass manufacture graphene will be disruptive to many applications; it is not a rare earth material but offers similar potential

    On pg 9 your paper describes employment impacts of technology and suggests there will be widespread unemployment as industries disappear. That is one scenario, however throughout history, each 'age' has experienced similar challenges, albeit at a slower pace, with the end result that each subsequent generation has seen new job creation usurp the former generation time and again. I anticipate disruption and instability, but ingenuity will result in different jobs - many we cannot conceive of now.  Even in the face of widespread unemployment, many stable countries exist with high unemployment today, without being conflict centres.

  • The Operational Environment and the Changing Character of Future Warfare - Version 5, dated 23 October 2018 has now been uploaded to the Mad Scientist APAN site.

  • The authors of "The Operational Environment and the Changing Character of Future Warfare" have not overcome the essence of AI, which overcomes all the risks from AI of past generations.

    At the very beginning, the authors presented a version of the division into eras: "The Era of Accelerated Human Progress" and "The Era of Contested Equality". This separation assumes that neither side has a platform with AI (AIZero), which overcomes all the risks of all AI of previous generations. After all, the use of such AIZero suggests a scenario that is different from both the described eras.

    "The Era of Accelerated Human Progress" is a description of events, with competition in the development of second-generation AI.

    "The Era of Contested Equality" is described as an era when, by itself, the same level of development came to all people.

    Here, either AIZero will appear and will be, according to some principle, equally accessible to every person in the world, but the author says nothing; or a speech about the 2nd generation AI, and not about AIZero, which overcomes all the problems from the impact of AI of past generations.

    DARPA speaks of the AINext functionality as a 3rd generation AI that overcomes all the risks of 2nd generation AI. But the essence by which DARPA describes AINext is a highly developed 2nd generation AI. Bottom in the description of the entity there is nothing indicating the ontology of the predictive algorithm of quantum computations.

    The description of quantum computing in the article is beyond the scope of the AI ​​platform. Quantum computing is presented not in the context of AI, but as one of the next applied technology of scientific progress.

    A quantum computational algorithm is an AI (AIZero) algorithm that overcomes all the risks of all past AIs. Overcoming this means that it is a predicate of all algorithms of all past AI (subjects of this predicate).

    The AIZero algorithm simultaneously contains both the algorithms of all fundamental sciences and the algorithms of quantum computation.

    The algorithm of quantum computing does not exclude, but complements the existing algorithms of fundamental sciences.

    The AIZero algorithm is a software of a quantum platform.

    The ontology of the algorithm of the quantum computing model is the ontology of the quantum model of the platform architecture, including the subjects of the predicate.

    The article talks about AI and quantum computing, but where in the article there is no description of how quantum computing predicatively prioritizes scenarios for those for whose purposes the "transformative effect" occurs. In other words, the article contains no description whatsoever.

    a) the essence of the "quantum computing algorithm",

    b) the essence of the "priorities of scenarios",

    c) the essence of the person for whose purposes the "transformative influence" occurs,

    g) the essence of "transformative impact" and the essence of its "origin."

    The article describes how "generals prepare for a past war." At the same time, the author indirectly nevertheless assumes such possibilities of the opposing sides, which he (the author) is not yet able to understand. But the author describes these incomprehensible possibilities not as predicative quantum computing of the AIZero platform, but as the rapid development of algorithms of basic sciences.

    The description of the ontology of the "algorithm" and the very "algorithm" of quantum computing - was created almost 90 years ago. The author of the "algorithm", having lived almost to the end of the last century, predicted that humankind would start using this algorithm in 300 years.

    While his predictions come true.

    I hope that this will happen earlier, and we will be able to witness such a development of mankind. And if we are lucky, we will be active participants.

    (The language of ontology, which describes a quantum algorithm, cannot be overcome for an ordinary person to read and understand - I checked it on myself, on all relatives and friends. Understanding does not depend on the national language in which you can learn ontology. Why did I need to learn this language, understand ontology and get acquainted with the description of the algorithm? I was just curious and wondering if I could understand this. I studied ontology for 4 years.)