is a 1st vice president in modern history to take on his former running mates. that'd be good to go for this. i've been reacting with surprise and some without and go to the use of a major with the rebel live series. it's end to he is a bit of rivalry that's prompted several legal cases. then you deal between the pga tour the they've and the european base d p. world war will see all that go away. but players who have stayed loyal to the pga tour express their anger over the u. turn to the to us commission and of complaint. they weren't consulting the . this is audra 0. and these, all the headlines president fraud, muse lensky says, the destruction of the nova costco dime in southern ukraine, has left hundreds of thousands of people without drinking water. at least 7 people are missing and thousands of been moved to say for ground chop stock for it has more from capstone way. evacuations are still ongoing. we've seen

a lot of people being pulled out on boats like this, many of them bringing that pets. many of them very distraught. indeed, we thought a little bit of showing, but it hasn't been heavy. it has been sporadic. we know that russian forces are literally only a couple of kilometers when we think around 5 kilometers may be in that direction. on the other side of the river present, zalinski says that these plans a result of an attack by russia on that down in order to try and prevent under violence by ukrainian forces across the river or emergency clothes from fine send a us are heading to canada to help fight hundreds of wines fires in the province of quebec. the smoke is traveling south triggering equality allies. so people in the united states ensure lanka, police, a fi, t, a guy for students marching in the capitol, colombo,

they're demanding. the release of active is detained. during protests against the governments last year, us secretary of state antony built blinking has held talks with sandra radius conference. mom had been solomon. i had a meeting with goals, corporation counsel for ministers inside you review. the us state department says they have candid discussions that included human rights concerns and ending the war e. m in and britain springs. harry is testifying in london's high court for a 2nd day. and his civil case against america group use papers. the parent company of the daily mirror area ledges that at least a 100 articles published over 20 is contained information obtained. so a legal means like phone hacking is a 1st u k y l to enter the witness box since 1890. those are the headlines on audra 0 is always one use on our website at alger 0 dot com. tom mccrae will have been use our for you in under 13 minutes coming up next. here though is to stream, i hope you just stay with us for that. thanks so much. i, the boston law

a will along with, with neither side, willing to negotiate because the ukraine war becoming a forever war is america's global leadership, increasingly fragile. what will us politics look like as we had to the presidential election of 2024. quizzical look. us politics, the boston line, the . hi, i'm heidi joe castro and welcome to the stream. the role of artificial intelligence has long been debated in military communities. but with recent leap, frog advancements and the technology discussions about the role of ai in warfare are gaining urgency. so today we ask is in a i arms race underway as always we want to hear from you. so please be sure to share your thoughts and questions on our youtube chat.

joining us to discuss from washington d. c. paul, shari arthur, of for battle ground power and the age of artificial intelligence with us from london. melanie garson cyber policy lead and director of geo politics at the tony blur institute for global change. and with us from san jose costa rica, mat moody researcher and advisor on artificial intelligence and human rights with an estate international. thank you to our guests for joining us today. melanie, i'd like to 1st start with the question, why are we here? are we really facing an a i arms race a thank you and it's good to join us. i think of the way we frame a retrace. we have to be really careful. just set that on races to different parts of the honda thing. a i but be careful to understand that it's

a system of systems. so what we're seeing recently with a lot of the narrative is face races to understand different parts of the process. is it that with at that now it's language models or something? oh, good them. so the parts or components and they will be so the advice to different parts of the whole technologies. mm hm. but i think it's a re upped recap to think about. it's not just the way. so the kind of imagery that we have of a i west to me. well, we do know global leaders have talked about this a lot, right? coming from the us from china, from russia, president putin even saying previously that the nation that leads in a, i will be, quote, the ruler of the world. paul, i want to come to here for this question about practical things. how are military's currently already using ai as well? we're certainly seeing militaries around the world adopting a uh in fact, it's already being used in the war and ukraine is so widely available. it's not

just advance as military's that are using a on even civilians can kept our hands on air technology. so we seen, for example, civilian drone operators and ukraine that are working with ukrainian military using small quad comforter. drones have used a i tools that are available online for free and embedded these into the grounds for things like image recognition. so when the drought is looking down on the ground with a camera, it's not just human eyes. it's also the a i is looking through this camera and detecting objects. that's a truck, that's a tank. that's a very valuable tool and warfare. but it isn't an arms race. i have to agree with no, one of the reality is we're not seeing it. when we look at spending, it's about one percent of the us military spending. that's on and honestly it's, it's not even a priority. if we're being honest. right, right now the ways that it is being used is data analysis, right,

and surveillance. the data analytics firm palance here has developed a tool to help commanders make battlefield decisions. here's a video of how that works. it confirms that potential threats to drones, but it shows an enemy g, 80 main battle tank. generate 3 courses of action to target this and then the equipment the operator uses a i peach generate 3 possible sources of action to target the sending the equipment . next they use a i p to automatically send these options up. the chain is command, send these 3 options to my commander for review. if you listen, if you listen closely to that description key here, is that still the decisions are being taken by humans. however, the pentagon said in january that it will allow the development of a guy that can make kill shots on their own. and so i wanted to point to my laptop

where there's some examples of what is in development. this is the us air force, designing a combat system where human piloted fighters will eventually fly in tandem with drone wing. then we have here russia in the us developing jerome submarines. this one you're seeing here is the unmanned $85.00 foot orca developed by the us navy, which will be used to lay sea. mine's this video, it's a little bit out there, but the australian army is testing telepathic robot dogs. they do not need voice commands because the operator wears a headset that detects brain ways. and the robot dog complies. and finally, a real current example. again, we're talking about russia and ukraine. the russia says it's deployed the marker on man ground vehicle in ukraine, supposed to automatically recognize western tanks and destroys them match. i would

like to come to you next. we see all these. a advancements in development at least in the air on the ground in the seas. what are your concerns to? well, 1st of all, i think, pointing to the fact that melanie said, these are systems of systems is really important because part of the narrative around it means that we fall into this into this trap of basically thinking that the systems are new and haven't been in development for a long time, and as you just pointed to, it's been a, it's been a debate that has been standing for, for a couple of decades now. but in particular, in the sort of weaponized nation space in the military space. we've been talking about this and from the, from the envelope autonomy as weapon systems. i think it's really important to, to understand that from that angle. because what we see is that there are unique risks that are close by the systems which consist of various components that are being deployed happened, deployed again over the last 2 decades. that includes the system such as facial recognition. it includes systems i, predictive analytics include systems such as

a motion recognition. these get paired up with other more advanced computer vision technologies and deployed and things such as drones and things like air defense systems. and we've seen time and time again. but despite the fact that they make full claims about what is possible and conditions of warfare, they end up either falling short or leading to disastrous consequences. we only have to go as far as to up the 27th of march and 2020, under libya. and prime minister, where economists aerial vehicles are used to shut down logistics convoys. we saw a number of different examples in which civilians were effectively becoming casualties of the systems. and this is again a largely, um, sort of, i guess, make mason to be around systems that have long standing records in terms of the research that show that they invariably violate our human rights. they violate our

rights privacy, our rights to, to equality and non discrimination. we saw how facial recognition technologies was used against black life matter. protesters at the arch following the murder of george floyd. i imagine now systems that are weaponized using the same technologies which are biased and which, which also when not biased or used in context that are discriminatory, institutionally, that can only lead to the further erosion of our rights. and, and this is why it's so important to, to tackle those technologies, you know, discreetly, before we get into, to sort of this essential this debate on a, i mean, sort of taking over the world and mat, you brought up the development of fully economists, weapons which is something that military's across the world are looking at paul, what is the line between semi autonomous weapons which are currently used in combat and fully economists and have we crossed that line yet? well, we're getting close and certainly you know,

the systems we have today and you showed pictures of many of the different robotics systems that are in development under see in the air are still controlled by people . humans are still directing them in that video. humans are in the loop making decisions very few countries and really none of the leading military nations have rule out fully. economists, webpage that will be making their own decisions about who to kill on the battlefield and the technology exist today. all it takes is for somebody to put it together. there were some videos that came out in ukraine last summer that showed all of the components of the technology. humans were still in charge, but really all, it takes it for a few minutes to just step out of that loop. and then we, we'd begin to cross that threshold where machines are making their own decisions in a battlefield allows him to kill. yeah, melanie, i want you to watch this video with us. um it is about and, and it's an arms dealers who are actively promoting new

a i power tools to potential customers. and here's one sales pitch heard at the u. a. e's international defense exhibition in february we'd be focusing into one of the homeless, you know, some friends at the moment, but really, you know, across his mind and see we've been busy, even even though i've given them all on i'm on a, i have everything from what's happening, i mean, more than what, what fed acquaintances to do from time to time? so we need to meet to meet, to always updated with weights in the market on market to meet with us out on this product. read the customer requirement. melanie, what does the arms industry and even the tech industry for that matter? what does a stand to gain from selling this a? i tap to military's the o without doubt,

lots of advantages to using a unable price. this is within the full 5 phase for good and for some of the risks within have address set that comes with a i enable price that says well, of massively helps them with i to already seeing this going back to russia, ukraine and logistics planning, which is always one of the biggest challenges, but in the military knowing how to get wet to water at what point it can not help in a situational analysis. so the areas that it can make actually will fat will accurate . by the same token, it can make for fat far, but it's a way of, you know, the accountability challenges, who have people difficult i think be in the clip we just saw. and i think it said some of the changes we try. we have the capital of a bit of a some a coil. so what sort of a, of whether, you know, a bad it's like, for me is definitely think, well, we need to the, you know,

what the customer wants to because actually of the reality of every possible field . it's different training the data to be able to see, and this is one of the great challenges we thank to see which some of the i use ca, i in the battlefield. is that lights on having massive amounts of tracing data to be able to act in a specific focus on to and what we know by fulfill this those circumstances. and after just saying that, that's going to be one of the challenges, which is why as pull pointed out, based at the price of suits we see today. but to the west point receipts that they still need to keep the human somewhat in the loop. so it's very much what is the purpose of that technology pool? yeah, and that's this training material. i itself can be biased and it can be flawed. so there is the risk of a defense systems responding to a false alarm bronco mirror. john is a researcher at the candidate and canadian piece research institute, and she sent us this comment. there's a lot of discussion about a bias there that

a i who lives to me to simply makes things up. and those, those concerns are really acute in the complex and dynamic environment that awards on this. so we're talking about, you know, decisions over human lives potentially. and so i think was really key to understand is, is the role of a i in transforming a human decision making and particularly the use of a i, in weapon systems. and there's a, you know, an ongoing discussion of the u. n. an economy has been systems which really has focused on issues of human control, so ensuring that it humans are the ones that are ultimately making decisions to select and engage targets and also accountability so that we can hold someone accountable for the decisions that are made by a system, but in a system match, you have a machine, makes a lease on the stake. how do we hold that accountable?

i think it's important to understand that those systems were both built and operated by particular actors. i think our current discussion has been focusing so much on what technologies are capable of and to some extent devices that are, that are built within it. but we haven't actually talked about regulations and safeguards, and that's really striking to me given that the focus on reliability and precision of the systems distracts us from the harms that the systems cause. and ultimately gets us away from what we need to be talking about. when it comes to a systems at large, which is about exactly what we're, what you're mentioning, carriage is accountability. so both the companies that are developing that technologies, the actors that are using that technology is the national context within which the technology is operating, who are effectively the responsible party developing the budgets, the framework under which that technology can be used all have a shared responsibility in and effectively the kinds of data that this might lead

to or the kinds of meanings that it might lead to. because of course, we see that to what we have to understand is that even when the reliability of the systems are perfected in a sort of a hypothetical scenario, we would potentially giving way for compounded forms of discriminatory violence and showing showing effects. we're looking at things such as institutional racism biases in terms of seem to be able is that manifest within the systems of things that under pin how we conduct work there up against certain individuals and groups . that may harper, a particular appearances that appear to match stereotypes that we have about what enemy combatants look like. and so you can only imagine how historically marginalized communities, in particular, end up being at the sharpest end of the nice that is a i military applications. yeah. and i promise we will talk about regulations in a moment to come. but 1st, paul, i,

i wanted to or smear this discussion to the threat of nuclear warfare. now if this is not something that people are saying is eminent, however we have to at least touch on this to be clear. no one is saying a i should be offered the nuclear codes. that is not what we're talking about. but it could inadvertently escalate complex as well. people are concerned, as we see military is adopt a i what are the lines whether it's a time is weapons or really for the most consequential and destructive weapons that we have nuclear weapons. how do we ensure that a i is nowhere near? is it a clear lodge codes if you guys have been yeah, in the loop on anything related to nuclear decision making? now what's fascinating is, this is now official us government policy. it came out last fall in the us defense department's nuclear posture. review that human will always be in the loop for all information relating to decisions following using the use nuclear weapons. but we

haven't seen that from all nuclear countries. we haven't seen the statement from russia or china about what are their policies going to be? i think that's when we think about cooperation and avoiding harmonson military. i. that seems like a pretty low bar to clear. that's like a great starting point. say we all agree, humans seem to be in control of anything related to nuclear weapons. and maybe we can build from there. and it would be great to see other nuclear on countries out of a similar policy. right? yeah, i think go ahead melanie. so i know, i think that's a really valuable i think the in the compensation of the assumption that we don't have control at this point to decide where we employ a west and then give a tend to we keep on control of that. and when we have the baseline light, we have the 2 players in the weaponry and we have a, you know, precedence for using that. that is a study base,

a full cooperation of 4 agreements to be built forward on this. and there has been a little bit of movement on this um map, maybe you want to jump back in here at the recent summit's, the re aimed summit hosted by the never netherlands in south korea earlier this year. did that result in some action toward regulating a guy in the military? again, the focus of those conferences of summits and the focus of largely the discussion around military has been around the responsible uses of, of a. i think that's dangerous because by talking about responsible uses of the military context. we're assuming inevitability and we're moving away from thinking about questions such as, should any of these technologies be used in those context at all? that's an important question to ask, given that many of the again, the component technologies that make up the larger system of, for example, of tournaments, weapon systems have records of dire records of human rights farms caused by their

usage by, for example, police forces and cities. but they don't have record showing that they are generating greater efficiency is, are leading to lower and crime, which is often the sorts of narrative that are, is espoused by various law enforcement agency is actually the kinds of a fantasy sort of, technically utopian fantasies that exist out there, or a largely based on again, let's make oil to, to borrow melanie's term here. and i think that's, that's again, it's telling for us that coming into those spaces, it's assuming and that that will be able to read it. rather than assuming that there was a conversation to be had about regulation. so just being conscious of that's where we need to bring it back to and, and the kinds of the narrative that we also see around the, it's a central angle. yeah. right. that like actually it's going to get access to the nuclear codes. and before we know what the planet is going to be destroyed whilst an important conversation, also once again distract from the cards that are documented that happening on an

everyday basis related to systems like facial recognition, gate recognition and motion recognition, predictive and i like to use the politic as, as predicted, policing so, so we need to return to ways of regulating those technologies as well. was having this larger conversation to. yeah. and i want to get into deep fakes in a minute. but you mentioned that you believe this is an inevitable. however, there are many who may disagree in and think that the genie is now out of the bottle. one of them is the computer scientist and a guy pioneer. the godfather of ai of has some have called him jeffrey hinton, who spoken me about the urgent need for the world to come together, terrain and a i for the existential threat. the i gave my wife is who lived last like nuclear weapons because nuclear weapons had the possibility, they would just bypass everybody. and that's why people could cooperate on preventing that. because the existential threat, i think, may be the us in china,

in europe, in japan, could all co operate on trying to avoid that ex, essential threat. but the question is, how should they do that? i think stopping development isn't feasible. well, in our last remaining minutes, i don't want to neglect the possibility of this information, not the possibility, but the reality that it's happening. one example is a video that went viral in january featuring so called american pan. african is supporting a military coup in burkina faso. here's a brief example. hello to the african people and particularly to the berk in a people. we are americans from africa, and we are pan africanist. we appealed to the solidarity of the african people and the people of burkina faso to effectively support the authorities of the transition . we must support the patriotic movement for safe guard and restoration,

and president abraham trailer, who imposes respect for his sovereignty. let us all remain mobilized behind the berkener people in this common struggle homeland or death. we shall overcome melanie son. they watch that. and last because it is so obviously fake. however, it does have the potential of, of doing real harm, doesn't it? sure, absolutely. that is the, with any form of manipulation of the, i'm the use of the general to the i, whether it to the word or through imagery has the potential to impact uh, both a democratic was ending and trust and trust in information as a whole, which i can be part of the breakdown of how we operate in the faith in elections. i do so in this system, but in any form of decision making and our lives. but that,

that doesn't mean it's either inevitable. so in some of the ways some of the same purchases that generate the populum, old paul took the parts that says that can help us tackle the program to find solutions to it. yeah, well, least the conversation is happening worldwide. the paul, i'm going to ask you the final question for today, and it is, what should we be most worried about at this moment? i think we need to start thinking hard about regulating the most capable ai systems . and i don't know that we need to be distracted by, you know, the radical concerns, but we look just practical concerns today. the most capable systems like g p, t for the successor to chat g p t can synthesize chemical weapons. demonstrated that it can help do that. it can be used as a cyber tool for authentic cyber attacks. that's what kind of technology that we don't necessarily want widely available to just anyone. and what do you start

thinking about non proliferation approaches to control this technology? so that doesn't get in the hands of terrorists and others who might cause harm with it. all right, well there was another conference in costa rica in february was the 1st regional intern governmental meeting on a guy in the military. and they produced a complete, communicated calling for the urgent negotiation of a binding international treaty. so some progress, however, it a to urge for more negotiation perhaps is still a step that's not very advanced. so that's, that's all for the time we have today. i want to thank you 2 or 3 guess paul melanie and matt, thank you for sharing with us your comments and your expertise, and we will see you next time the

the approved or reject the most progressive constitution ever proposed for any nation. and there's 3. yes or no voted no. the big picture us was a question that goes into the very foundation of judy until the cause of its

relationship with indigenous people. the muscle and the midst of chewed pos to on the jersey, the african narrative. from african perspective. the and to continue to do show the documentaries, by african filmmakers from rwanda and democratic republic of congo. sure, efficiency. andrew c r e z on if i need to go, i'm, i'm on the drive on and reinventing cost on a new series of africa, direct on how to sierra gags no control, 80 percent of the sky pretend and they're extending their presence to other parts of the country, people say they have had enough and have started to go ask through gang members. there's been fighting going on between rival gangs. were told that members of the g

9 gang are not far away from here. they have set on fire houses here. they also rape and kill. i was the direction change, but i know the nation government doesn't what goes is good for him. divine and has increase my new age meant in the country, like 30 percent over 100000 children are at risk of dying because of hunger. the, [000:00:00;00] the hello until mccrae. this has been use hellen live from coming up in the next 60 minutes. tens of thousands of ukrainians face homelessness and disease after widespread flooding from a damn collapse us secretary of state is need blinking mates. foreign ministers of