OBJ Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-68163172 As previously mentioned, everybody is worried about first strike. Next major power war has a good chance of starting this way. If any of this interests you, consider adding to your reading list 'The war in 2034.' Fiction positing China-Russia-Iran alliance with some interesting early stage combined operations, and sobering concerns about what happens if China attains Cyber superiority/mastery. On the other hand if you are Indian, you're probably really going to like this. https://www.amazon.com/2034-Novel-Next-World-War/dp/1984881256 Bob and Jane swarm operators getting ready to kickoff the next attack to take the next hill, might never get to theater in time if Mom dies in a subway wreck, or Dad freezes to death because the power went out, and brother Bill couldn't make it to his unit mob site because he first had to go fix the water treatment plant. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 45 minutes ago, OBJ said: The issues you bring up are autonomous AI in the close fight, CM level, not at operational or strategic depth. But in that regard, if machines can be taught to drive in cities, think of the complexity of situations the machine has to get right. If they can drive they will differentiate between a guy with his hands up and a guy taking a squat, or with mud on his face, or with a sun tan, eventually. Well at operational and strategic depth one now has to deal with the same problems one had in low intensity warfare - target discrimination. I don’t think you (or many others to be honest) realize just how much an issue this is in RL. We spend days training troops and billions on targeting architecture just to ensure we can consistently hit the right targets. There is an element of legality in all this (of course) but also major issues in efficiency and avoiding fratricide. I have no doubt fully autonomous is going to happen but it is a pipe dream to think that it is not going to be messy. Context is still king on the battlefield when it comes to targeting…how do you think we know whether or not an HVT is in fact high value half the time? Getting into strategic targeting one now has to discriminate deep in human terrain. Self driving cars understand physics, not human context. They can get you from A to B, but not why you want to get to B in the first place. At best one risks losing systems to deception, at worst one is committing warcrimes. Autonomy is coming but I strongly suspect advantage will go to whoever can pair humans with machines better. There is a layer of AI missing in all this right now - staff. AI staff assistance that can control other lower resolution AI is likely the partner we will need to make this work effectively and at advantage. It is a major fallacy to leap from “well we have self driving cars” to “that means we can use AI independently to do complex targeting in warfare”…at least not yet. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) 1 hour ago, Billy Ringo said: If your adversary has little to no concern about using AI/autonomous weapons on the battlefield due to ethical constraints, you may likely die on the battlefield while debating what should or should not be targeted. The ethical AI debate may be mute if your adversary has the ability to use similar technology. Based on the low value placed on human life by the Russians and the Chinese, as well as most terrorist organizations, I doubt they'll have any hesitation sending an AI targeted death package. Thankful for the contributions and commentary from so many on this forum, amazing and highly informative discussions. This pretty much sums up my “race to the bottom” stance. It is inevitable. There are too many advantages to fully autonomous systems to try and hold onto an ethical human-in-the-loop legalities. People connect “kill bots” to landmines in that they will risk indiscriminate targeting of non-combatants. This is true to be honest. Early AI (as I have mentioned) is unable to fully discriminate targets - and even if they could opponents will go out of their way to mess that up. But the difference is the decision advantage of autonomous weapons over AP landmines. One is not going to lose a war because you did not employ AP landmines. We know this. AP landmines were never decisive. They were a force multiplier and a nuisance. DPICM is a different story, hence why it got a more lukewarm reception in banning attempts. Fully autonomous weapon systems could very well mean the difference between winning and losing a war. At which point the very legal framework we employ to enforce the ethical and morale norms is at existential risk. So…race to the bottom. But it will not be a straight line. There are military advantages to human-machine pairing over complete autonomy beyond laws of war. Machines don’t blink but they can’t dream either. Warfare is a human social exercise and as such it requires human sensitivity to context. The only exception are wars of extermination, at which point I am not sure we are really talking about war anymore. The only military weapon system that does not require human context and are fully autonomous when deployed are strategic nuclear weapons. Any employment of AI less than that threshold is going to need some human element to be fully effective. Edited February 1 by The_Capt 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OBJ Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 15 minutes ago, The_Capt said: Well at operational and strategic depth one now has to deal with the same problems one had in low intensity warfare - target discrimination. I don’t think you (or many others to be honest) realize just how much an issue this is in RL. We spend days training troops and billions on targeting architecture just to ensure we can consistently hit the right targets. There is an element of legality in all this (of course) but also major issues in efficiency and avoiding fratricide. I have no doubt fully autonomous is going to happen but it is a pipe dream to think that it is not going to be messy. Context is still king on the battlefield when it comes to targeting…how do you think we know whether or not an HVT is in fact high value half the time? Getting into strategic targeting one now has to discriminate deep in human terrain. Self driving cars understand physics, not human context. They can get you from A to B, but not why you want to get to B in the first place. At best one risks losing systems to deception, at worst one is committing warcrimes. Autonomy is coming but I strongly suspect advantage will go to whoever can pair humans with machines better. There is a layer of AI missing in all this right now - staff. AI staff assistance that can control other lower resolution AI is likely the partner we will need to make this work effectively and at advantage. It is a major fallacy to leap from “well we have self driving cars” to “that means we can use AI independently to do complex targeting in warfare”…at least not yet. As mentioned, I'd be interested in the references that inform your opinion. If they are compelling, I will change mine. Also, please don't misinterpret, I have the utmost respect for you as a military professional, combat veteran, war college instructor. You mention context a number of times and we are what we've been, and if our context is Canadian low intensity conflict, then that's what we are. Previously I said, Autonomous AI will be part of systems and platforms, another tool, component, aspect of warfighting. The time when wars are fought exclusively by AI systems is still a ways off, if we ever get there. People will be involved in warfighting for a long time to come. Did you look at https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/2928194/artificial-intelligence-autonomy-will-play-crucial-role-in-warfare-general-says/ Feb 22 - Target management, close fight, low intensity/ counter insurgency? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbindc Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 In terms of AI, I think we'd be better off thinking of autonomous systems less in terms of tactical target selection (i.e. "kill/no kill <> hands up/hands down") and more in the Arms of the Future sense. One good example would would be a fast AI drone with powerful auditory sensors attuned to the particular magnetostrictive hum of Russian power transformers. Or pipeline compression facilities. Or high tension power lines. Or the engine of a tank/self propelled artillery/etc. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 hour ago, The_Capt said: This pretty much sums up my “race to the bottom” stance. It is inevitable. The scary part is what we're talking about is not even close to the bottom. Autonomous nano might not even be. Autonomous nano delivered gene splicing... that's likely the bottom because when we reach that we're probably done as a species. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, billbindc said: In terms of AI, I think we'd be better off thinking of autonomous systems less in terms of tactical target selection (i.e. "kill/no kill <> hands up/hands down") and more in the Arms of the Future sense. One good example would would be a fast AI drone with powerful auditory sensors attuned to the particular magnetostrictive hum of Russian power transformers. Or pipeline compression facilities. Or high tension power lines. Or the engine of a tank/self propelled artillery/etc. Yup. If my goal is to take out an enemy's power grid, I'd love to have something I send into its territory on short notice without any target prep and have the grid shut down within an hour. Better still, something that can attach itself to the power grid and be used as leverage. "Do what I want or I destroy your power grid. You have 1 hour to give an answer". Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiduk Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) 3 hours ago, cesmonkey said: Three were intercepted northwest of Sevastopol, two were intercepted over the airfield, and one was intercepted directly above the ground. Its debris crashed into the ground and detonated without causing damage to the runway. Well, I was too busy thees weeks, now I back ) France recently handed over 40 SACLPs. I veeery doubt 12 of them were wasted in such way Local TGs yesterday reported missile strike hit three fighter jets Su-27 and Su-30, one of them was destroyed and killed at least 8 men. But today ASTRA TG claimed communication post of Belbek airfield was hit with two missiles. SCALP is impacting - SAM missile is launching %) Edited February 1 by Haiduk 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiduk Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) 4 hours ago, Carolus said: UA proclaims that they sank Russian corvette "Ivanovets" with kamikaze USV. This is first successfull attack of "wolfs pack" naval drones, which finished with the sinking of the ship. Recently UKR Naval Forces commander told UKR will significanly develop own naval drones capability, including special methods of coordinated attacks, involving AI. About destroyed ship, strictly saying this is not missile corvette, but large missile boat. Soviet naval classifacation had only "missile boats" (RKA) and "small missile ships" (MRK). There were't formally "large missile boats" in classification, but among boats class were the ones, possesing a place between missile boat and small missile ship. Modern Russian classification already has corvettes, but they some larger than MRKs. Destroyed "Ivanovets" is pr. 1241.1 "Molniya" (rus."Lightning", NATO class name "Tarantul"). Comissioned in 1989. 56 m in lenght, full load 493 tons. Armed with 4 x 3M80 Moskit (NATO code SS-N-22-) anti-ship supersonic missiles (2,35-2,8M) with 90 km of range and 150 kg of HE in warhead. "Ivanovets" belonged to 295th battatlion of 41st missile boats brigade. Three Tarantul-class misile boats there were in composition of BSF. They still enough danger weapon platforms and can threaten to our cargo shipping Last known photo of "Ivanovets" dated by Sep 29th 2023 Edited February 1 by Haiduk 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 Quote The crash site of the Russian IL-76 in the Belgorod region of the Russian Federation. SATELLITE PHOTOS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiduk Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) We have a shortage of artillery shells, so FPV our only hope UKR troops repelled company size assault of Russian troops near Novomykhailivka (Maryinka - Vuhledar sector), using mostly FPV atatcks. 12 Russian vehicles were destroyed/damaged/abandoned UCAV company of 72nd mech.brigade scored 9 vehicles, 2nd mech.battalion of 72bd brigade - 1 and ATGM company of brigade's AT-battalion - 1 Edited February 1 by Haiduk 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiduk Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 Next example how FPVs expelled Russians from our previously captured positions. 103rd TD brogade launched pack of drones, including heavy FPVs "Mamont", carring HE charges. In result of strikes, position was badly damaged, Russians lost 8 KIA and WIA, called evacuation and abandoned position. FPVs saved lives and health of our infantry. This is also example of compete command, unlike a week ago scandal, when deputy commander of 74th recon batalion has sent two experienced FPV operators to direct assault of lost position and prohibited (!!!) them to attack Russians with drones. As a result assault failed, both operators were killed. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiduk Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 Russian TG Romanov92 reported UKR troops established new bridgehead in Krynky (yellow zone) SW from holding part of this very long village. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 Quote https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/02/artificial-intelligence-war-autonomous-weapons/677306/ War is a fearsome accelerant of arms races. Before Russia invaded Ukraine two years ago, the ethics of using land mines and cluster munitions were the subject of heated debate, and many states had signed agreements not to use either. But once the desperate need to win takes over, governments can lose their qualms and embrace once-controversial technologies with gusto. For that same reason, the war between Russia and Ukraine has banished any misgivings either country might have had about military use of artificial intelligence. Phillips O'Brian checks in on the subject of the day. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 hour ago, Haiduk said: We have a shortage of artillery shells, so FPV our only hope UKR troops repelled company size assault of Russian troops near Novomykhailivka (Maryinka - Vuhledar sector), using mostly FPV atatcks. 12 Russian vehicles were destroyed/damaged/abandoned UCAV company of 72nd mech.brigade scored 9 vehicles, 2nd mech.battalion of 72bd brigade - 1 and ATGM company of brigade's AT-battalion - 1 Impressive result. It was difficult to see what the MBTs were. It would be interesting to know if any where other than T-72 based. Certainly the MT-LBs are an indication of substandard equipment in this sector. What this says to me is Russia should be mounting dismounted attacks only while Ukraine's artillery response is weakened. I don't see drones as an effective countermeasure to large scale, well dispersed infantry attacks. Ironically, it's too precise. Artillery is still superior for this sort of thing. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 3 hours ago, OBJ said: As mentioned, I'd be interested in the references that inform your opinion. If they are compelling, I will change mine. Also, please don't misinterpret, I have the utmost respect for you as a military professional, combat veteran, war college instructor. You mention context a number of times and we are what we've been, and if our context is Canadian low intensity conflict, then that's what we are. I got to be honest, I am not sure what your opinion is at this point. That autonomous AI technology will dominate warfare? I think that is a solid assumption. Will AI be able to do everything a human can, better? No, not likely for some time re: context - and human context applies to every war (really don't need references for that point). The side that can take the strengths of AI/autonomy and humans, and pair them together into a supporting system will have advantage? Not really sure how that is much different than what we already do. That we need to be cautious oversubscribing what AI can do, as much as we need to be cautious undersubscribing? Give me an opinion to inform and then we can talk references. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said: The scary part is what we're talking about is not even close to the bottom. Autonomous nano might not even be. Autonomous nano delivered gene splicing... that's likely the bottom because when we reach that we're probably done as a species. Steve Aw c'mon man, not before lunch. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 Ukraine Goes After Russia's Fuel Tanks in Record Hunt (msn.com) Ukraine's bid to degrade vital Russian supply lines in the occupied south and east of the country is being reflected in the rising number of fuel transport vehicles being reported destroyed in Kyiv's daily battlefield tallies. Through January, the Ukrainian defense ministry claimed 937 fuel cars and cisterns had been destroyed or damaged beyond repair, the highest monthly tally since the beginning of Moscow's full-scale invasion in February 2022. Similar losses in December—931—were the second-highest monthly total of the war, per Kyiv's tallies. The rising attrition rate may be a reflection of Russia's costly offensive activities, which have seen the Kremlin's troops pushing forward in hotspots including Avdiivka in eastern Donetsk Oblast, and on the northeastern front near Kupiansk in Kharkiv Oblast. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) Maybe once there will be something like 'mutually assured destruction' in conventional warfare thanks to drones and AI. Edited February 1 by Thomm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OBJ Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 5 minutes ago, The_Capt said: I got to be honest, I am not sure what your opinion is at this point. That autonomous AI technology will dominate warfare? I think that is a solid assumption. Will AI be able to do everything a human can, better? No, not likely for some time re: context - and human context applies to every war (really don't need references for that point). The side that can take the strengths of AI/autonomy and humans, and pair them together into a supporting system will have advantage? Not really sure how that is much different than what we already do. That we need to be cautious oversubscribing what AI can do, as much as we need to be cautious undersubscribing? Give me an opinion to inform and then we can talk references. Aw come on Capt., don't be touchy. It takes character to change opinion, especially in a public forum, especially when you are a recognized thought leader. You appear to have the courage and confidence to have done so. I have yet to get there myself, at least here recently. Third time now, but who's counting, I said, Autonomous AI will be part of systems and platforms, another tool, component, aspect of warfighting. The time when wars are fought exclusively by AI systems is still a ways off, if we ever get there. People will be involved in warfighting for a long time to come. Below are a few references supporting what I think is a shared opinion: Dec 23 - US DoD view, 'Replicator' initiative in August 2022, first iteration fielding thousands of autonomous systems across multiple domains within the next 18-to-24 months. https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3604459/defense-officials-report-progress-on-replicator-initiative/#:~:text=Hicks unveiled the Replicator initiative,China's rapid armed forces buildup. Nov 23 - European view, as is, trending, cautions https://cepa.org/article/between-killer-robots-and-flawless-ai-reassessing-the-military-implications-of-autonomy/ Feb 22 - US GO view, target management, close fight, low intensity/ counter insurgency. https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/2928194/artificial-intelligence-autonomy-will-play-crucial-role-in-warfare-general-says/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/01/opinions/ukraine-army-chief-war-strategy-russia-valerii-zaluzhnyi/index.html Ukraine’s army chief: The design of war has changed Opinion by Valerii Zaluzhnyi 5 minute read Updated 10:48 AM EST, Thu February 1, 2024 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) 36 minutes ago, OBJ said: Third time now, but who's counting, I said, Autonomous AI will be part of systems and platforms, another tool, component, aspect of warfighting. The time when wars are fought exclusively by AI systems is still a ways off, if we ever get there. People will be involved in warfighting for a long time to come. Good lord…gotta be honest must have missed this. It sounded more like you were proposing that Autonomous AI would replace human beings completely within warfare, or at least high intensity warfare. My position, which I hope was clearer, is that no, they will not be replacing completely because AI is not there yet. As to them becoming “part of systems and platforms…etc”. We are already there - no debating that point. I think the challenge now is how to best integrate them and take advantage of the strengths they bring to the modern battlefield. The side that can do that is going to have deterministic advantage. Of course we are talking about much more than unmanned vehicles at this point, or even PGM for that matter. The side that can integrate AI et al into a system that can provide accurate (read trustworthy) predictive analytics within context of warfare is going to have major superiority. Human staffs already do a version of this but if AI can give a staff an ability to forecast - with repeatable accuracy - what an opponent is going to do in the future, we are talking about a temporal superiority concept. Then the competition will be to 1) break the predictions through random behaviours (in Afghanistan we used to roll dice to determine when we left a FOB) while also still trying to exert control - there is a fun paradox. And, 2) push our own analytics out past the horizon of what an opponent can see - we can see what they will do further out than they can for us. This would have to all be in real time with effects on the ground so a massive dynamic theory that can handle adaptive non-linear behaviours. That is the shining city on the hill, but I am not sure we will ever get there. Edited February 1 by The_Capt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbindc Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 6 minutes ago, The_Capt said: GThen the competition will be to 1) break the predictions through random behaviours (in Afghanistan we used to roll dice to determine when we left a FOB) while also still trying to exert control - there is a fun paradox. The Wallfacer era of military operations has begun... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 17 minutes ago, billbindc said: The Wallfacer era of military operations has begun... Gawd, I hope Netflix doesn't screw that one up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbindc Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 "It is well known by now that a central driver of this war is the development of unmanned weapons systems. They are proliferating at a breathtaking pace and the scope of their applications grows ever wider. Crucially, it is these unmanned systems – such as drones – along with other types of advanced weapons, that provide the best way for Ukraine to avoid being drawn into a positional war, where we do not possess the advantage. But while mastery of such technologies is key, it is not the only factor influencing current strategy." https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/01/opinions/ukraine-army-chief-war-strategy-russia-valerii-zaluzhnyi/index.html?fbclid=IwAR3B_d9MEggxMAQJ39LmoGZEa6Hrlij2c5bs62tLQhsWM1ccFb7psNDLmm8 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.