Saturday, 9 September 2023

Opinion ‘How am I in this war?’: The untold story of Elon Musk’s support for Ukraine

Opinion ‘How am I in this war?’: The untold story of Elon Musk’s support for Ukraine

Opinion ‘How am I in this war?’: The untold story of Elon Musk’s support for Ukraine





Elon Musk, SpaceX founder and chief executive, in Paris on June 16. (Nathan Laine/Bloomberg)






by Walter Isaacson



Walter Isaacson is a professor of history at Tulane University, former editor of Time magazine and author of several biographies. This op-ed is excerpted from his latest book, “Elon Musk.”




An hour before Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine (military operations to be precise) on Feb. 24, 2022, it used a massive malware attack to disable the routers of the American satellite company Viasat that provided communications to the country. The command system of the Ukrainian military was crippled, making it almost impossible to mount a defense. Top Ukrainian officials frantically appealed to SpaceX founder Elon Musk for help, and the deputy prime minister, Mykhailo Fedorov, used Twitter to urge him to send Ukraine terminals so it could use the satellite system that the company had built. “We ask you to provide Ukraine with Starlink stations,” he wrote.







Musk agreed. Two days later, 500 Starlink terminals arrived in Ukraine. “We have the U.S. military looking to help us with transport, State has offered humanitarian flights and some compensation,” Gwynne Shotwell, Musk’s president at SpaceX, emailed him. “Folks are rallying for sure!”


“Cool,” Musk responded. “Sounds good.” He got on a Zoom call with President Volodymyr Zelensky, discussed the logistics of a larger rollout and promised to visit Ukraine when the war was over.


Ever since he was a scrawny and socially awkward kid getting beaten up on his school playground in South Africa, Elon Musk has liked to imagine himself as a hero rushing to the rescue, engaged in epic quests. He was deeply into comics, and the single-minded passion of the superheroes impressed him.


“They’re always trying to save the world, with their underpants on the outside or these skintight iron suits, which is really pretty strange when you think about it,” he says. “But they are trying to save the world.” The war in Ukraine, when no other company or even country could manage to keep communications satellites working, gave him a center-stage opportunity to show his humanitarian instincts while playing superhero. It also showed the complexities of critical military infrastructure being controlled by an often well-intentioned but mercurial private citizen.


Lauren Dreyer, SpaceX’s director of Starlink operations, began sending Musk updates twice a day. “Starlink kits are already allowing Ukraine Armed Forces to continue operating theater command centers,” she wrote on March 1. “These kits can be life or death, as the opponent is now focusing heavily on comms infrastructure.


The next day, SpaceX sent 2,000 more terminals via Poland. But Dreyer said the electricity was off in some areas, so many of them wouldn’t work. “Let’s offer to ship some field solar+battery kits,” Musk replied. “They can have some Tesla Powerwalls or Megapacks too.” The batteries and solar panels were soon on their way.


Every day that week, Musk held regular meetings with the Starlink engineers. Unlike every other satellite service, they were able to find ways to defeat Russian jamming. By March 6, the company was providing voice connections for a Ukrainian special operations brigade. Starlink kits were also used to connect the Ukrainian military to the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command and to get Ukrainian television broadcasts back up. Within days, 6,000 more terminals and dishes were shipped, and by July there were 15,000 Starlink terminals operating in Ukraine.


Starlink was soon garnering lavish press coverage. “The conflict in Ukraine has provided Musk and SpaceX’s fledgling satellite network with a trial-by-fire that has whetted the appetite of many Western militaries,” Politico wrote after profiling Ukrainian soldiers on the front lines using the service. “Commanders have been impressed by the company’s ability, within days, to deliver thousands of backpack-sized satellite stations to the war-torn country and to keep them online despite increasingly sophisticated attacks from Russian hackers.” The Wall Street Journal also did a feature. “Without Starlink, we would have been losing the war,” one Ukrainian platoon commander told the paper.


Starlink contributed about half of the cost of the dishes and services it provided. “How many have we donated so far?” Musk wrote to Dreyer on March 12. She replied, “2000 free Starlinks and monthly service. Also, 300 heavily discounted.” The company soon donated 1,600 additional terminals, and Musk estimated its total contribution to be around $80 million.


Other funding came from government agencies, including those in the United States, Britain, Poland and the Czech Republic. There were also contributions from private individuals. The historian Niall Ferguson sent out an email to friends seeking to raise $5 million for the purchase and transport of 5,000 more Starlink kits. “If you would like to contribute, please let me know as soon as you can,” he wrote. “I cannot overstate the importance of the role Starlink has played in keeping the communications of the Ukrainian government from being taken out by the Russians.” Three hours later, he got a reply from Marc Benioff, the billionaire co-founder of Salesforce. “I’m in for $1M,” he wrote. “Elon rocks.”


By September, however, both Musk and military leaders in Ukraine and the United States were realizing the complexity of their relationship. One Friday evening that month, just after spending a week with Musk, I was back home in New Orleans watching a football game at my old high school. (The occasion was that it was one of the final games for the school’s superstar quarterback, Arch Manning.) My phone started vibrating with messages from Musk.


“This could be a giant disaster,” he texted. I went behind the bleachers to ask him what the problem was. He was in full Muskian crisis-hero-drama mode, this time understandably. A dangerous issue had arisen, and he believed there was “a non-trivial possibility,” as he put it, that it could lead to a nuclear war — with Starlink partly responsible. The Ukrainian military was attempting a sneak attack on the Russian naval fleet based at Sevastopol in Crimea by sending six small drone submarines packed with explosives, and it was using Starlink to guide them to the target.


Although he had readily supported Ukraine, he believed it was reckless for Ukraine to launch an attack on Crimea, which Russia had annexed in 2014. He had just spoken to the Russian ambassador to the United States. (In later conversations with a few other people, he seemed to imply that he had spoken directly to President Vladimir Putin, but to me he said his communications had gone through the ambassador.) The ambassador had explicitly told him that a Ukrainian attack on Crimea would lead to a nuclear response. Musk explained to me in great detail, as I stood behind the bleachers, the Russian laws and doctrines that decreed such a response.


Throughout the evening and into the night, he personally took charge of the situation. Allowing the use of Starlink for the attack, he concluded, could be a disaster for the world. So he secretly told his engineers to turn off coverage within 100 kilometers of the Crimean coast. As a result, when the Ukrainian drone subs got near the Russian fleet in Sevastopol, they lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly.


When the Ukrainian military noticed that Starlink was disabled in and around Crimea, Musk got frantic calls and texts asking him to turn the coverage back on. Fedorov, the deputy prime minister who had originally enlisted his help, secretly shared with him the details of how the drone subs were crucial to their fight for freedom.


“We made the sea drones ourselves, they can destroy any cruiser or submarine,” he texted using an encrypted app. “I did not share this information with anyone. I just want you — the person who is changing the world through technology — to know this.”


They are asking for more.” The next day, SpaceX sent 2,000 more terminals via Poland. But Dreyer said the electricity was off in some areas, so many of them wouldn’t work. “Let’s offer to ship some field solar+battery kits,” Musk replied. “They can have some Tesla Powerwalls or Megapacks too.” The batteries and solar panels were soon on their way.


Every day that week, Musk held regular meetings with the Starlink engineers. Unlike every other satellite service, they were able to find ways to defeat Russian jamming. By March 6, the company was providing voice connections for a Ukrainian special operations brigade. Starlink kits were also used to connect the Ukrainian military to the U.S.


Joint Special Operations Command and to get Ukrainian television broadcasts back up. Within days, 6,000 more terminals and dishes were shipped, and by July there were 15,000 Starlink terminals operating in Ukraine. Starlink was soon garnering lavish press coverage. “The conflict in Ukraine has provided Musk and SpaceX’s fledgling satellite network with a trial-by-fire that has whetted the appetite of many Western militaries,” Politico wrote after profiling Ukrainian soldiers on the front lines using the service.


“Commanders have been impressed by the company’s ability, within days, to deliver thousands of backpack-sized satellite stations to the war-torn country and to keep them online despite increasingly sophisticated attacks from Russian hackers.” The Wall Street Journal also did a feature.


“Without Starlink, we would have been losing the war,” one Ukrainian platoon commander told the paper. Starlink contributed about half of the cost of the dishes and services it provided. “How many have we donated so far?” Musk wrote to Dreyer on March 12.


She replied, “2000 free Starlinks and monthly service. Also, 300 heavily discounted.” The company soon donated 1,600 additional terminals, and Musk estimated its total contribution to be around $80 million. Other funding came from government agencies, including those in the United States, Britain, Poland and the Czech Republic. There were also contributions from private individuals.


The historian Niall Ferguson sent out an email to friends seeking to raise $5 million for the purchase and transport of 5,000 more Starlink kits. “If you would like to contribute, please let me know as soon as you can,” he wrote. “I cannot overstate the importance of the role Starlink has played in keeping the communications of the Ukrainian government from being taken out by the Russians.”


Three hours later, he got a reply from Marc Benioff, the billionaire co-founder of Salesforce. “I’m in for $1M,” he wrote. “Elon rocks.” By September, however, both Musk and military leaders in Ukraine and the United States were realizing the complexity of their relationship.


One Friday evening that month, just after spending a week with Musk, I was back home in New Orleans watching a football game at my old high school. (The occasion was that it was one of the final games for the school’s superstar quarterback, Arch Manning.) My phone started vibrating with messages from Musk. “This could be a giant disaster,” he texted. I went behind the bleachers to ask him what the problem was. He was in full Muskian crisis-hero-drama mode, this time understandably. A dangerous issue had arisen, and he believed there was “a non-trivial possibility,” as he put it, that it could lead to a nuclear war — with Starlink partly responsible.


The Ukrainian military was attempting a sneak attack on the Russian naval fleet based at Sevastopol in Crimea by sending six small drone submarines packed with explosives, and it was using Starlink to guide them to the target. Although he had readily supported Ukraine, he believed it was reckless for Ukraine to launch an attack on Crimea, which Russia had annexed in 2014. He had just spoken to the Russian ambassador to the United States. (In later conversations with a few other people, he seemed to imply that he had spoken directly to President Vladimir Putin, but to me he said his communications had gone through the ambassador.) The ambassador had explicitly told him that a Ukrainian attack on Crimea would lead to a nuclear response.


Musk explained to me in great detail, as I stood behind the bleachers, the Russian laws and doctrines that decreed such a response. Throughout the evening and into the night, he personally took charge of the situation. Allowing the use of Starlink for the attack, he concluded, could be a disaster for the world. So he secretly told his engineers to turn off coverage within 100 kilometers of the Crimean coast.


As a result, when the Ukrainian drone subs got near the Russian fleet in Sevastopol, they lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly. When the Ukrainian military noticed that Starlink was disabled in and around Crimea, Musk got frantic calls and texts asking him to turn the coverage back on. Fedorov, the deputy prime minister who had originally enlisted his help, secretly shared with him the details of how the drone subs were crucial to their fight for freedom.


“We made the sea drones ourselves, they can destroy any cruiser or submarine,” he texted using an encrypted app. “I did not share this information with anyone. I just want you — the person who is changing the world through technology — to know this.” Musk replied that the design of the drones was impressive, but he refused to turn the coverage for Crimea back on, arguing that Ukraine “is now going too far and inviting strategic defeat.”


He discussed the situation with President Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley, explaining to them that he did not wish Starlink to be used for offensive purposes. He also called the Russian ambassador to assure him that Starlink was being used for defensive purposes only.


“If the Ukrainian attacks had succeeded in sinking the Russian fleet, it would have been like a mini Pearl Harbor and led to a major escalation,” Musk says. “We did not want to be a part of that.” He took it upon himself to help find an end to the war in Ukraine, proposing a peace plan that included new referendums in Donbas and other Russian-controlled regions, accepting that Crimea was a part of Russia and assuring that Ukraine remained a “neutral” nation rather than becoming part of NATO. It provoked an uproar.


“F--- off is my very diplomatic reply to you,” said Ukraine’s ambassador to Germany. Zelensky was a bit more cautious. He posted a poll on Twitter asking users which Musk they liked better: “One who supports Ukraine” or “One who supports Russia.” Musk backed down a bit. “SpaceX’s out of pocket cost to enable and support Starlink in Ukraine is ~$80M so far,” he wrote in response to Zelensky’s question. “Our support for Russia is $0. Obviously, we are pro Ukraine.” But then he added, “Trying to retake Crimea will cause massive death, probably fail and risk nuclear war.


This would be terrible for Ukraine and Earth.” In early October, Musk extended his restrictions on the use of Starlink for offensive operations by disabling some of its coverage in the Russian-controlled regions of southern and eastern Ukraine. This resulted in another flurry of calls and highlighted the outsize role that Starlink was playing. Neither Ukraine nor the United States had been able to find any other communication systems that could match Starlink or fend off attacks from Russian hackers.


Feeling unappreciated, he suggested that SpaceX was no longer willing to bear some of the financial burden. Shotwell, president of SpaceX, also felt strongly that the company should stop subsidizing the Ukrainian military operation. Providing humanitarian help was fine, but private companies should not be financing a foreign country’s war.


That should be left to the government, which is why the United States has a foreign military sales program that puts a layer of protection between private companies and foreign governments. Other companies, including big and profitable defense contractors, were charging billions to supply weapons to Ukraine, so it seemed unfair that Starlink, which was not yet profitable, should do it for free. “We initially gave the Ukrainians free service for humanitarian and defense purposes, such as keeping up their hospitals and banking systems,” she says.


“But then they started putting them on f---ing drones trying to blow up Russian ships. I’m happy to donate services for ambulances and hospitals and mothers. That’s what companies and people should do. But it’s wrong to pay for military drone strikes.”


Shotwell began negotiating a contract with the Pentagon. SpaceX would continue to provide another six months of free service to the terminals that were being used for humanitarian purposes, but it would no longer provide free service to ones used by the military; the Pentagon should pay for that.


An agreement was struck that the Pentagon would pay SpaceX $145 million to cover the service. But then the story leaked, igniting a backlash against Musk in the press. He decided to withdraw his request for funding. SpaceX would provide free service indefinitely for the terminals that were already in Ukraine.


“The hell with it,” he tweeted. “Even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free.” Shotwell thought that was ridiculous. “The Pentagon had a $145 million check ready to hand to me, literally. Then Elon succumbed to the bullshit on Twitter and to the haters at the Pentagon who leaked the story.” Fedorov tried to smooth things over by sending Musk encrypted text messages lavishing him with thanks.


“Not everyone understands your contribution to Ukraine. I am confident that without Starlinks, we would be unable to function successfully. Thanks again.” Fedorov said he understood Musk’s position of not allowing Starlink service to be used for attacks in Crimea. But he pushed Musk to allow Ukraine to use the service to fight in the Russian-controlled regions in the south and east. That led to an amazingly candid secret encrypted exchange: After his exchange with Fedorov, Musk felt frustrated. “How am I in this war?” he asked me during a late-night phone conversation.


“Starlink was not meant to be involved in wars. It was so people can watch Netflix and chill and get online for school and do good peaceful things, not drone strikes.” In the end, with Shotwell’s help, SpaceX made arrangements with various government agencies to pay for increased Starlink service in Ukraine, with the military and CIA working out the terms of service. More than 100,000 new satellite dishes were sent to Ukraine at the beginning of 2023.


In addition, Starlink launched a companion service called Starshield, which was specifically designed for military use. SpaceX licensed Starshield satellites and services to the U.S. military and other agencies, allowing the government to determine how they could and should be used in Ukraine and elsewhere.


























































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel Tes SMAKBO

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0



























google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel UTBK SNBT

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0






























google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel UTBK SNBT

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0






























































Friday, 8 September 2023

Australia to require Google, Bing to clamp down on AI-created child porn

Australia to require Google, Bing to clamp down on AI-created child porn











Australia has unveiled regulations requiring internet search engines to crack down on child sexual abuse material created by artificial intelligence.







The online safety code announced on Friday will require services such as Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo and Yahoo to take “appropriate steps” to prevent the spread of child exploitation material, including “synthetic” images created by AI.


The announcement comes after the eSafety commissioner delayed the implementation of an earlier version of the code in June after Microsoft and Google introduced AI functionality for their internet search engine services.


“The use of generative AI has grown so quickly that I think it’s caught the whole world off guard to a certain degree,” eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant said in a statement.


Grant said the code was a “great example” of how regulators and tech firms could work together to make the internet more safe.


“When the biggest players in the industry announced they would integrate generative AI into their search functions we had a draft code that was clearly no longer fit for purpose and could not deliver the community protections we required and expected,” she said.


”We asked the industry to have another go at drafting the code to meet those expectations and I want to commend them for delivering a code that will protect the safety of all Australians who use their products.”


Earlier this year, the BBC reported that paedophiles have been using the AI software Stable Diffusion to create and sell life-like child sexual abuse material on content-sharing sites such as Patreon.


Australia’s eSafety commissioner is currently working on drafting two new codes to regulate online storage services such as iCloud and OneDrive, and private messaging services, respectively


Efforts by governments to increase oversight of cloud and messaging services to combat child exploitation have prompted pushback from the tech industry and privacy advocates.


WhatsApp and Signal have threatened to pull out of the United Kingdom if it passes the Online Safety Bill, which would require platforms to scan for child sexual abuse material.


Tech firms and civil libertarians say the law would compel platforms to scrap end-to-end encryption, putting the privacy of all users at risk.


In June, Australia’s eSafety commissioner announced codes to regulate social media, internet carriage services, app distribution services, hosting services and equipment providers.


Breaches of the codes are subject to civil penalties.


































































































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel Tes SMAKBO

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0









































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel UTBK SNBT

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0
















































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel UTBK SNBT

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0













































































Russia 'doesn’t need' Western-promoted pride agenda, says Lavrov

Russia 'doesn’t need' Western-promoted pride agenda, says Lavrov

Russia 'doesn’t need' Western-promoted pride agenda, says Lavrov





©Alexander Shcherbak/TASS






Russia can do without the values promoted by Western countries at their "pride marches" in their capitals, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Friday.







"These (Western) values(…) If we can call what we see now and then at pride parades in European capitals as such; if they want to force these values on Orthodox Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, or Hindus, then we don’t need any of this. Let them amuse themselves and leave us alone," he said at a meeting with representatives from the Soviet and Russian Alumni Association of Bangladesh at the Russian Embassy in that country.


"They are doing this aggressively. This is what distinguishes Western democracies (from other countries)," Lavrov stressed.



Sergey Lavrov arrives in New Delhi to take part in G20 summit



Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov arrived in India for participation in the G20 Summit. His plane landed in the Indira Gandhi International Airport in New Delhi.


The Russian Foreign Minister arrived in New Delhi from Dhaka.


Lavrov leads the Russian delegation to the G20 summit under order from Russian President Vladimir Putin. According to Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, the minister will speak at two plenary meetings of the upcoming meeting.


Zakharova underscored that Moscow intends to contribute to the Delhi Summit’s success and India’s G20 presidency in general in every way possible. The diplomat noted that the Russian side hopes for "a similar response approach from all remaining G20 member states, especially the ones from the Western perimeter," and will "actively counteract any detrimental processes in this regard" in cooperation with the wide circle of friendly nations, friendly G20 partners and the BRICS.



Moscow Expects Final G20 Document to Include Settlements in National Currencies



Russia expects the final G20 document to cover in detail the issue of settlements in national currencies, Dmitry Birichevsky, director of the Department of Economic Cooperation at the Russian Foreign Ministry, told Sputnik.


“Our representatives are now working on it [the final document], they are already in New Delhi... This year, we expect detailed coverage of the topic of the global monetary and financial system, the issue of settlements in national currencies," Birichevsky said when asked what results Russia expects from the G20 and what it would like to see in the final document.


India has been chairing the G20 since December 1, 2022. The group's summit will be held in New Delhi on September 9-10. The leaders of the G20 countries and nine other states - Bangladesh, Egypt, Spain, Mauritius, Nigeria, the Netherlands, the UAE, Oman and Singapore - have been invited to attend. The Russian delegation at the summit will be led by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and China's delegation by Chinese Premier Li Qiang.





































































































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel Tes SMAKBO

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0













































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel UTBK SNBT

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0
















































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel UTBK SNBT

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0






















































































In U.S.-China AI contest, the race is on to deploy killer robots

In U.S.-China AI contest, the race is on to deploy killer robots

In U.S.-China AI contest, the race is on to deploy killer robots











Alongside Sydney Harbour, engineers are working on a submarine that will be powered by artificial intelligence and will have no human crew. The project is being driven by a contest between the U.S., its allies and China to develop AI-controlled weapons that will operate autonomously, including warships and fighter jets. The outcome of this competition could determine the global balance of power.



To meet the challenge of a rising China, the Australian Navy is taking two very different deep dives into advanced submarine technology.







One is pricey and slow: For a new force of up to 13 nuclear-powered attack submarines, the Australian taxpayer will fork out an average of more than AUD$28 billion ($18 billion) apiece. And the last of the subs won’t arrive until well past the middle of the century.


The other is cheap and fast: launching three unmanned subs, powered by artificial intelligence, called Ghost Sharks. The navy will spend just over AUD$23 million each for them – less than a tenth of 1% of the cost of each nuclear sub Australia will get. And the Ghost Sharks will be delivered by mid-2025.


The two vessels differ starkly in complexity, capability and dimension. The uncrewed Ghost Shark is the size of a school bus, while the first of Australia’s nuclear subs will be about the length of a football field with a crew of 132. But the vast gulf in their cost and delivery speed reveal how automation powered by artificial intelligence is poised to revolutionize weapons, warfare and military power – and shape the escalating rivalry between China and the United States. Australia, one of America’s closest allies, could have dozens of lethal autonomous robots patrolling the ocean depths years before its first nuclear submarine goes on patrol.


Without the need to cocoon a crew, the design, manufacture and performance of submarines is radically transformed, says Shane Arnott. He is the senior vice-president of engineering at U.S. defense contractor Anduril, whose Australian subsidiary is building the Ghost Shark subs for the Australian Navy.


“A huge amount of the expense and systems go into supporting the humans,” Arnott said in an interview in the company’s Sydney office.


Take away the people, and submarines become much easier and cheaper to build. For starters, Ghost Shark has no pressure hull – the typically tubular, high-strength steel vessel that protects a submarine's crew and sensitive components from the immense force that water exerts at depth. Water flows freely through the Ghost Shark structure. That means Anduril can build lots of them, and fast.


Rapid production is the company’s plan. Arnott declined to say, though, how many Ghost Sharks Anduril intends to manufacture if it wins further Australian orders. But it is designing a factory to build “at scale,” he said. Anduril is also aiming to build this type of sub for the United States and its allies, including Britain, Japan, Singapore, South Korea and customers in Europe, the company told Reuters.


Anduril’s Shane Arnott wouldn’t say how many Ghost Shark submarines his company planned to manufacture, but it is planning a factory to build “at scale,” he said. Here he is seen in Sydney with Anduril’s Dive-LD, an autonomous submarine that can reach depths of 6,000 meters, according to the company website. Handout via Anduril.


“There is a lot of warfare that is dull, dirty and dangerous. It is a lot better to do that with a machine.”

Shane Arnott, senior vice-president of engineering at U.S. defense contractor Anduril


A need for speed is driving the project. Arnott points to an Australian government strategic assessment, the Defense Strategic Review, published in April, which found the country was entering a perilous period where “China's military build-up is now the largest and most ambitious of any country since the end of the Second World War.” A crisis could emerge with little or no warning, the review said.


“We can’t wait five to 10 years, or decades, to get stuff,” said Arnott. “The timeline is running out.”


This report is based on interviews with more than 20 former American and Australian military officers and security officials, reviews of AI research papers and Chinese military publications, as well as information from defense equipment exhibitions.


An intensifying military-technology arms race is heightening the sense of urgency. On one side are the United States and its allies, who want to preserve a world order long shaped by America’s economic and military dominance. On the other is China, which rankles at U.S. ascendancy in the region and is challenging America’s military dominance in the Asia-Pacific. Ukraine’s innovative use of technologies to resist Russia’s invasion is heating up this competition.


In this high-tech contest, seizing the upper hand across fields including AI and autonomous weapons, like Ghost Shark, could determine who comes out on top.


“Winning the software battle in this strategic competition is vital,” said Mick Ryan, a recently retired Australian army major general who studies the role of technology on warfare and has visited Ukraine during the war. “It governs everything from weather prediction, climate change models, and testing new-era nuclear weapons to developing exotic new weapons and materials that can provide a leap-ahead capability on the battlefield and beyond.”


Anduril’s Dive-LD autonomous submarine can operate autonomously for 10 days, according to the company’s website. The Dive-LD is seen here cruising through Sydney Harbour. Handout via Anduril.




If China wins out, it will be well placed to reshape the global political and economic order, by force if necessary, according to technology and military experts.


Most Americans alive today have only known a world in which the United States was the single true military superpower, according to a May report, Offset-X, from the Special Competitive Studies Project, a non-partisan U.S. panel of experts headed by former Google Chairman Eric Schmidt. The report outlines a strategy for America to gain and maintain dominance over China in military technology.


If America fails to act, it “could see a shift in the balance of power globally, and a direct threat to the peace and stability that the United States has underwritten for nearly 80 years in the Indo-Pacific,” the report said. “This is not about the anxiety of no longer being the dominant power in the world; it is about the risks of living in a world in which the Chinese Communist Party becomes the dominant power.”


The stakes are also high for Beijing. If the U.S. alliance prevails, it will make it far harder for the People’s Liberation Army, or PLA, as the Chinese military is known, to seize democratically governed Taiwan, control the shipping lanes of East Asia and dominate its neighbors. Beijing sees Taiwan is an inalienable part of China and hasn’t ruled out the use of force to subdue it.


The Department of Defense had no comment “on this particular report,” a Pentagon spokesperson said in response to questions. But the department’s leadership, the spokesperson added, has been “very clear” regarding China as “our pacing challenge.” Regarding a possible attack on Taiwan, the spokesperson said, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and other senior leaders “have been very clear that we do not believe an invasion is imminent or inevitable, because deterrence today is real and strong.”


China’s defense ministry and foreign ministry didn’t respond to questions for this article.


A spokesperson for Australia’s Department of Defence said it was a priority to “translate disruptive new technologies into Australian Defence Force capability.” The department is investigating, among other things, “autonomous undersea warfare capabilities to complement its crewed submarines and surface fleet, and enhance their lethality and survivability,” the spokesperson said.


Some leading military strategists say AI will herald a turning point in military power as dramatic as the introduction of nuclear weapons. Others warn of profound dangersif AI-driven robots begin making lethal decisions independently, and have called for a pause in AI research until agreement is reached on regulation related to the military application of AI.


Despite such misgivings, both sides are scrambling to field uncrewed machines that will exploit AI to operate autonomously: subs, warships, fighter jets, swarming aerial drones and ground combat vehicles. These programs amount to the development of killer robots to fight in tandem with human decision makers. Such robots – some designed to operate in teams with conventional ships, aircraft and ground troops – already have the potential to deliver sharp increases in firepower and change how battles are fought, according to military analysts.


Some, like Ghost Shark, are able to perform maneuvers no conventional military vehicle could survive – like diving thousands of meters below the ocean surface.


The Black Hornet 3 nano-drone weighs less than 33 grams, or a bit more than an ounce, and can fly almost silently, giving soldiers a real-time view of the battlefield. Teledyne FLIR handout.




Perhaps even more revolutionary than autonomous weapons is the potential for AI systems to inform military commanders and help them decide how to fight – by absorbing and analyzing the vast quantities of data gathered from satellites, radars, sonar networks, signals intelligence and online traffic. Technologists say this information has grown so voluminous it is impossible for human analysts to digest. AI systems trained to crunch this data could deliver commanders with better and faster understanding of a battlefield and provide a range of options for military operations.


Conflict may also be on the verge of turning very personal. The capacity of AI systems to analyze surveillance imagery, medical records, social media behavior and even online shopping habits will allow for what technologists call “micro-targeting” – attacks with drones or precision weapons on key combatants or commanders, even if they are nowhere near the front lines. Kiev’s successful targeting of senior Russian military leaders in the Ukraine conflict is an early example.


AI could also be used to target non-combatants. Scientists have warned that swarms of small, lethal drones could target big groups of people, such as the entire population of military-aged males from a certain town, region or ethnic group.


“They could wipe out, say, all males between 12 and 60 in a city,” said computer scientist Stuart Russell in a BBC lecture on the role of AI in warfare broadcast in late 2021. “Unlike nuclear weapons, they leave no radioactive crater, and they keep all the valuable physical assets intact,” added Russell, a professor of computer science at the University of California, Berkeley.


The United States and China have both tested swarms of AI-powered drones. Last year, the U.S. military released footage of troops training with drone swarms. Another video shows personnel at Fort Campbell, Tennessee, testing swarms of drones in late 2021. The footage shows a man wearing video game-like goggles during the experiment.


The United States and China have both tested swarms of AI-powered drones. The footage shows the testing of drone swarms at Fort Campbell, Tennessee, in late 2021. DARPA handout.




For the U.S. alliance, swarms of cheap drones could offset China’s numerical advantage in missiles, warships and strike aircraft. This could become critical if the United States intervened against an assault by Beijing on Taiwan.


America will field “multiple thousands” of autonomous, unmanned systems within the next two years in a bid to offset China's advantage in numbers of weapons and people, the U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, Kathleen Hicks, said in an August 28 speech. “We’ll counter the PLA’s mass with mass of our own, but ours will be harder to plan for, harder to hit, harder to beat,” she said.


Even drones with limited AI capability can have an impact. Miniature, remote-controlled surveillance drones with some autonomy are already in service. One example is the pocket-sized Black Hornet 3 now being deployed by multiple militaries.


This drone can fit in the palm of a hand and is hard to detect, according to the website of Teledyne FLIR, the company that makes them. It is reminiscent of the movie “Eye in the Sky,” in which a bug-like drone is used against militants in Kenya. Weighing less than 33 grams, or a bit more than an ounce, it can fly almost silently for 25 minutes, sending back video and high-definition still images to its operator. It gives soldiers in the field a real-time understanding of what is happening around them, according to the company.


The AI military sector is dominated by software, an industry where change comes fast.


Anduril, maker of the AI-powered Ghost Shark, is trying to capitalize on the desire of the U.S. alliance to quickly team humans with intelligent machines. The company, which shares its name with a fictional sword in Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings” saga, was founded in 2017 by Palmer Luckey, designer of the Oculus virtual reality headset, now owned by Facebook. Luckey sold Oculus VR to the social media giant for $2.3 billion in 2014.


Arnott, the Anduril engineer working on Ghost Shark, said the company is also supplying equipment to Ukraine. The Russians rapidly adapted to this gear deployed in battle, so Anduril has been pushing out regular updates to maintain an advantage.


Palmer Luckey, founder of the virtual reality company Oculus, displays an Oculus Touch input during an event in San Francisco in 2015. Luckey now heads Anduril, which he says he formed to “radically transform the defense capabilities of the United States.” REUTERS/Robert Galbrait.




“Something happens,” he said. “We get punched in the face. The customer gets hit with something, and we are able to take that, turn it around and push out a new feature.”


Arnott didn’t provide details of the equipment, but Anduril referred Reuters to a February announcement from the Biden administration that included the company’s ALTIUS 600 munition drone in a package of military aid to Ukraine. This drone can be deployed for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. It can also be used as a kamikaze drone,armed with an explosive warhead that can fly into enemy targets.


Ukraine has already reportedly used drone surface craft packed with explosives to attack Russian shipping. Military commentators have suggested that Taiwan could use similar tactics to resist a Chinese invasion, launching big numbers of these vessels into the path of the fleet heading for its beaches.


Asked by Reuters about Taiwan’s drone program, the office of President Tsai Ing-wen said in June that the island had drawn “great inspiration” from Ukraine’s use of drones in its war with Russia.


Footage from a Ukrainian naval drone shows it hitting a Russian warship in the Black Sea in early August. While Russia’s Defence Ministry said the attack by two sea drones had been repelled, footage later showed the warship being towed to shore by a tug and listing heavily.




China, the United States and U.S. allies have programs to build fleets of stealthy drone fighters that will fly in formation with crewed aircraft. The drones could peel off to attack targets, jam communications or fly ahead so their radars and other sensors could provide early warning or find targets. These robots could instantly share information with each other and human operators, according to military technology specialists.


America is planning to build a 1,000-strong fleet of these fighter drones, U.S. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall told a warfare conference in Colorado in March. At the Zhuhai air show in November, China unveiled a jet fighter-like drone, the FH-97A, which will operate with a high degree of autonomy alongside manned combat aircraft, providing intelligence and added firepower, according to reports in the Chinese state-controlled media. China, the United States and Japan are also building large, uncrewed submarines similar to Australia’s Ghost Shark.


One overwhelming advantage of these autonomous weapons: Commanders can deploy them in big numbers without risking the lives of human crews. In some respects, performance improves, too.


Jet-powered robot fighters, for instance, could perform maneuvers the human body wouldn’t tolerate. This would include tight turns involving extreme G-forces, which can cause pilots to pass out. Aerial drones can also do away with the pressurized cockpits, oxygen supplies and ejector seats required to support a human pilot.


And robots don’t get tired. As long as they have power or fuel, they can carry on their missions indefinitely.


Because many robots are relatively cheap – a few million dollars for an advanced fighter drone, versus tens of millions for a piloted fighter jet – losses could be more readily absorbed. For commanders, that means more risk might become acceptable. A robot scout vehicle could approach an enemy ground position to send back high-definition images of defenses and obstacles, even if it is subsequently destroyed, according to Western military experts.


In 2011, the Chinese government spent about $3.1 million on unclassified AI research at Chinese universities and $8.5 million on machine learning, according to Datenna, a Netherlands-based private research company specializing in open source intelligence on China's industrial and technology sectors. By 2019, AI spending was about $86 million and outlays on machine learning were about $55 million, Datenna said.


“The biggest challenge is we don’t really know how good the Chinese are, particularly when it comes to the military applications of AI,” said Martijn Rasser, a former analyst with the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and now managing director of Datenna. “Obviously, China is producing world class research, but what the PLA and PLA-affiliated research institutions are doing specifically is much more difficult to discern.”


The July 1 death in a traffic accident in Beijing of a leading Chinese military AI expert provides a small window into the country’s ambitions.


At the time he died, Colonel Feng Yanghe, 38, was working on a “major task,” state-controlled China Daily reported, without going into detail. Feng had studied at the Department of Statistics at Harvard University, the report said.


In China, he headed a team that developed an AI system called “War Skull,” which China Daily said could “draft operation plans, conduct risk assessments and provide backup plans in advance based on incomplete tactical data.” The system had been used in exercises by the PLA, the report said.


The Biden Administration is so concerned about the tech race that it has moved to block China’s drive to conquer AI and other advanced technologies. Last month, Biden signed an executive order that will prohibit some new U.S. investment in China in sensitive technologies that could be used to bolster military capacity.


Anduril, the weaponry start-up created by VR-headset pioneer Palmer Luckey, has ambitions to be a major high-tech defense contractor. The Costa-Mesa, California-based company now employs more than 1,800 staff in the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. Luckey’s biography on the company website says he formed Anduril to “radically transform the defense capabilities of the United States and its allies by fusing artificial intelligence with the latest hardware developments.”


Anduril said Luckey was unavailable to be interviewed for this story.


The core of Anduril’s business is its Lattice operating system, which combines technologies including sensor fusion, computer vision, edge computing and AI. The Lattice system drives the autonomous operation of hardware that the company supplies, including aerial drones, anti-drone systems and submarines such as Ghost Shark.


In its biggest commercial success so far, Anduril early last year won a contract worth almost $1 billion to supply U.S. Special Operations Command with a counter-drone system. The U.K. Ministry of Defense has also awarded the company a contract for a base defense system.


Arnott wouldn’t describe the capabilities of Ghost Shark. The vessels will be built at a secret plant on Sydney Harbour in close collaboration with the Australian Navy and defense scientists. “We absolutely can’t talk about any of the applications of this,” he said.


But a smaller, three-tonne autonomous submarine in Anduril’s product line-up, the Dive-LD, suggests what unmanned AI-powered subs can do. The Dive-LD can reach depths of 6,000 meters and operate autonomously for 10 days, according to the company website. The sub, which has a 3D-printed exterior, is capable of engaging in mine counter-warfare and anti-submarine warfare, the site says.


With no need for a pressure hull, Anduril's Dive-LD can descend far deeper than the manned submarines in military service. The maximum depths reachable by military subs is usually classified information, but naval analysts told Reuters it is somewhere between 300 and 900 meters. The ability to descend to much greater depths can make a sub tougher to detect and attack.


Veteran navy officers say dozens of autonomous submarines like Ghost Shark, armed with a mix of torpedoes, missiles and mines, could lurk off an enemy’s coast or lie in wait at a strategically important waterway or chokepoint. They could also be assigned to strike at targets their AI-powered operating systems have been taught to recognize.


Australia’s nuclear subsea fleet will be more formidable than the unmanned submarines of today. But, they will also take much longer to materialize.


In the first part of the project, the United States will supply up to five Virginia-class submarines to Canberra. The first of those subs will not enter service until early next decade. A further eight of a new class of subs will then be built starting from the 2040s, as part of the same AUD$368 billion project, under the AUKUS agreement, a defense-technology collaboration between Australia, Britain and the United States.


By the time this fleet is an effective force, big numbers of lethal robots operating in teams with human troops and traditional crewed weapons may have changed the nature of war, military strategists say.


“There is a lot of warfare that is dull, dirty and dangerous,” said Arnott. “It is a lot better to do that with a machine.”


Some technology experts believe innovative commercial software developers now entering the arms market are challenging the dominance of the traditional defense industry, which produces big-ticket weapons, sometimes at glacial speed.


It is too early to say if big, human-crewed weapons like submarines or reconnaissance helicopters will go the way of the battleship, which was rendered obsolete with the rise of air power. But aerial, land and underwater robots, teamed with humans, are poised to play a major role in warfare.


































































































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel Tes SMAKBO

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0









































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel UTBK SNBT

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0






































google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

CTES Elog Bimbel - Daftar bimbel UTBK SNBT

google.com, pub-0655609370809761, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0