note >> >> then there were so few women in your class the and when you got out they were star students laugh firms did not want to hire the edward judges did not want to hire them or that clerks and the doors were shutting in their faces so there really had to make their own way so they created these absolutely brilliant careers that they made it up on the fly how they would get around the fact of all the standard employees said not interested. and that was not true by the time we came around by then

the judges wanted you to be there clerk can never faced that kind of discrimination and i didn't because of the incredible work and efforts that justice ginsburg and justice o'connor made. >> of course, that applied to me as well. for. >> [laughter] >> i know that. i did not mean to. >> but you mention opportunities because a lot did want to go onto public interest in and the path is to go right after they graduate from law school but you clerked for the d.c. circuit and you had a great fortune to clerk for justice marshall so what did in mean

to clerk for those extraordinary and greg. >> but clerking in general is the great thing to do it is a for everybody but it gives a sense of how the law works a different sense than what you have from law school and like me you have the chance to learn at the seat of people who of had terrific and exciting careers of one to talk more about those two people especially about justice marshall but he becomes a much better writer as a result and and you learn a law about how to actually make decisions which after just going through three

years of reading but then to see how they make decisions was eye opening combat least it was for me and then my legal analytics ken skills get better writing skills got better but then i clerked for the 10 most amazing human beings although he died just this past summer i have been thinking about him all what but he worked incredibly high level branches of government. >> that was the only one voice. >> and then served as counsel to the president for president clinton and was a judge congress judge then counsel to the president and

you learn so much about how government works, what you can expect of congress and the administrative agencies just an enormous amount of real world knowledge about government that he brought to his work because he judged on the d.c. area -- d.c. circuit and so much of their docket is about how government works and what those agency actions. but i also just learned when he was such a wonderful person and open and generous with a huge charge -- heart. and a wonderful mentor.

i learned a law from him personally. justice marshall was one of the greatest years of my life if you can say to young lawyer dream of one year long experience you cannot do better than that. you are clean 81 negative clerking with the supreme court he go to law school, you have read all of these decisions then you are there and interacting with the people's laugh written these decisions with legal issues and interesting issues but then i thought everybody should be envious

when into telling stories and he was funny make you laugh, make you cry believable stories about his life his childhood, his time in college if and law school vidal the different kinds of work if he did comment trial work been crisscrossing the south and era of jim crow you could not go off into a

restaurant use the bathroom african-american client was on trial for a crime he did not commit in trenton and all white jury and incredible stories about that era i felt was getting in american history lesson and also found a lawyer can do justice to of course, icahn never deal with the way justice marshall did it but just to be in his presence to soak the up enormously important. >> is there a take away from him quick. >> i think you have to be owned person i don't think what would he do because he was a different person added different time but i think

for everybody judges or lawyers you cannot have a better one for. >> to join in the university of chicago if but now president obama did you have much interaction greg. >> not really i knew him little bit but he had just carted teaching when i left. the only thing i remember actually he was teaching as an adjunct and he was practicing law and they're really wanted to hire him been decided he had better things to do. [laughter] but i remember a recruiting dinner that we had so i got

to know him a very little bit but not very much. >> with that experience you were faculty then left fan joint question like that is how i got to the clinton white house had decided to go into teaching a loved teaching was happy being a at the university of chicago which is a great place but the judge decided to leave his position on the bench to work for click president clinton and said. >> guest: to complex care it was a good time for me i had just gotten 10 the year and he gave and next thing which was about an exciting opportunity issue control for spirit and then to work

on areas like welfare reform and those ever in the public interest to demonstrate pet you can have that kind of passion to work in other areas it doesn't have to be a public interest entity. >> that's for sure and government does important things sometimes and makes their lives worse or better for me. you could not pick up place site think to get more done than if you are in the white house. and i had a great time done was a lawyer for part of it and policy for part of it i started as counsel to the president he asked me to

work for him so i did lawyer stuff then 18 months and i got the opportunity to switchover to do policy work for and that was new for me violate the ability to do new and different if things a was offered this opportunity asat i donald felt these issues of health care for immigration for welfare reform. end of spending enormous amounts of time pdf going over tobacco regulation would. the person who gave me the opportunity said you will learn and i did. it was a fun time. >> got you think there is value in knowing when to say yes to put your foot out there to make a change? >> i totally think that. when people ask for advice i

would say laugh students in-between our to risk averse. everybody else does this so i do to. i'm sorry that isn't my plan. ended doesn't include that and i found the best opportunities are the ones you did not expect them a huge believer in serendipity to think why young people ought to do is keep their eyes open for opportunities to say that sounds like a place i could make a difference.

and not sure where it goes mobile will try it. but it might open up to a new path by which we never expected and that would be terrific of all the things i have done in my life. >> you went to harvard after leaving the lighthouse was that in your plan? >> >> when you went to harvard there was a split in the faculty you were known as the unifier. in the public space everybody is not aligned so what can you share with us how you got the reputation

as a unifier to move the faculty for word? >> is important to talk to everybody when i first became there and harder it is a very large faculty and went to every single faculty member i sat down with them and have lunch or dinner one-on-one and said tell me about your concerns and how you think this place could be made better. it turns out just by listening you can get allied done. toussaint not sure want to go down that path. to say that you will understand them and bringing

people together to spend time and energy to make people feel that they are being heard. >> does that help you on the supreme court in? >> idol they get translates. [laughter] i do think i am a good listener. but i think i might listen pretty well. and that is pretty much everyplace. it is important to and in the court, we're all sitting around the table to figure out what we're saying and why. and try to figure out to reach consensus but to

really listen to people but to put yourselves in their shoes to see the world from their perspective is important to do. >> even though i have convictions and opinions nobody ever accused me of not knowing what i think but at the same time important 20 stand with other people think and why in order to make progress. the ability to put yourself in somebody shoes is what people should cultivated. that is an important gift and life.

>> so you made the campus more user-friendly and i want to talk about during your tenure you said it would be a requirement? >> >> you put more emphasis on that. >> was really important to have the best support we could for public-service work sordid put a law of emphasis on that. there was an enormous number of students doing the pro bono work and that imaginary requirement was 40 hours there were some doing thousands of hours.

the mostly thought that was a good thing and i tried to increase it is hard as a student it is hard to find jobs, it isn't in the same season, or big law firms and you are still looking but then financially it is difficult so to provide as much support as you can, of financial support. >> >> but some type of loan assistance program for those who do public-interest jobs during the summer to have a really good office to match people with employers.

now it is easier for the loss school than others now harvard is a pretty wealthy place sensibility for those who try to do this m places that don't have as much money but it is super important that they put a law of emphasis support for the public-interest work that the students do. >> do have that message. >> there is other advice that you have. one of them is the peers can teach as much as the professors nobody has a monopoly on the truth. >> ru reading my speeches? [laughter] i have. [laughter]

>> can you share that advice , many are in the audience? >> most important i think here i am trying to talk to people who try to find jobs but with career advice do what strikes you as meaningful and important and exciting and fun for i want to have the kind of job where you wake up every morning and you are eager to go to work because you think the work is challenging and it has some meaning. sometimes out will involve

to take risks but to find what will silly with that sense of excitement is the key thing if you don't find that the first time keep trying. some people go to law school in no exactly what they want to do but keep looking until it filled issue with the sense of purpose and that makes it fun to go to work everyday. >> and then you became the first female solicitor general that was exciting. >> it was the also scary. [laughter] >> i found until this job, which is the rest of my life, . [laughter] it is good that i like the job. [laughter] because it is the rest of my

life. [laughter] but before that i moved around a law. i hadn't done a job more than six years. i like that. not everybody does some people find one thing and that is what they want to deal for the rest of their life. that is great if that is the kind of person that you are. but for me and feel like i negative steep learning curve so we start something new and new and then it is time to go find something else where everything is new and exciting again. that is what i felt that the learning curve was vertical

that wasn't much of the curve. [laughter] and i never argued in the appellate court before. now you are arguing that the supreme court. >> candor first case was a cinch united. [laughter] that was scary. [laughter] it was the real argument it had been argued previously by the deputy solicitor general and actually he had argued the case literally day after a was confirmed and had gone to the office of solicitor general we were waiting and waiting for the case to come down finally the very last day the court said we want to set the case for real argument in september and the court never meets in september and

rewind the parties to focus on these issues whether the court should overrule campaign finance. so the writing was a little bit on the wall blackout - - the court was about to overturn the president -- president to have the regulation of that issue but whenever i got really really nervous silence day probably they'll ready made up their minds but it was pretty nerve wracking. i knew there'd be a law of people watching and my first argument. i worked to merely super hard. ahead of great fortune to have incredible people amount to me.

one thing about choosing three were kyushu's people who are great lawyers assuming you are doing a law job the people that you can lock the barn from -- learn from. the solicitor general's office they had terrifically years and felt there was learning all the time they gave me great advice about how to appear before the supreme court and how to argue so i did it second results is what you thought? [laughter] i lost by exactly the vote that i thought but that all year was a great experience i've learned a law justice

marshall was the solicitor general a remember he said go up to the podium and for him if gsa iamb thurgood marshall represented is states of america is stunning. it is for him that was not true of me. law of women have said that. but, still that is fantastic to go up to the supreme court denies states to say i represent united states of america on extremely important legal issues. >> of course, that was the job you had for your. >> i would have liked to

have had that for longer. >> it's not like you can say callback and if you years laugh laugh. >> kea were confirmed in record time you had your hearing june 28 confirmed august 6. >> it was really good time. second felt like it took forever. yes, it was great that happened so quickly. >> there was a law to do anything pretty much every senator 757 officers at the same time you were trying to prepare for your confirmation hearings there was a law. >> >> it didn't mind the process. >> there is one pending right now also you're not in

the same time frame. so now the court is left for / four with is the impact? >> there is a reason why courts to not usually have an even number of members they're adjusting is because if you had even number you have the possibility of a tie and that doesn't help anybody presumably were they do business to decide the cases most of the cases we take means there is a lack of uniformity for korea of a person one pace place subject to a different law than the person in another place and that is bad for federal law to apply differently in different parts of the country.

valley make sure federal law is uniform even more than that is what the court does. and we have to be in a position to do that we work real hard since justice scalia's passing we have worked hard to reach agreement we have not done the and very many cases and give credit to the chief justice and my colleagues as well, but still, there are times we cannot reach agreement and if you can, that is serious. sometimes even though be reached agreement that is only by every characterizing the issue in doubt way that really isn't the issue that

they needed decided maybe we've massage it to decide a different question and nobody cares about. [laughter] when the issue that they do care about and needed decided is unresolved. but that is a problem. a think the court has done a great job on the sleek really trying to make it work. i think the chief justice is incredible amount of credit for that. but there is a reason why courts have allied members to make sure they can reach decisions for all the cases that need decided and all the issues for. >> so go back to when your buddy was on the court and

there were a number of five / four decisions which was about 20% so with all the different chief justices' still the same percentage. >> it is something like that. people think that is all we do is reach the five / four decision but it isn't. there are some that we reached unanimously or lopsided. but there are some which previously were five / four now have the possibility to me four / four that is an issue. >> when you are there how does that affect your relationship. >> idol think honestly that it does you would like to

william very competitive anybody who knows me would tell you so there are times when we come back from one conference i am ready to go put my fist through the wall but justice scalia actually was my buddy and he would say if you take it personally you shouldn't be in this job that is absolutely right. first fed because for strategic reasons there be the next case in the next case and the next case after that. you better have continuing good relationships with your colleagues putting strategy aside, the fact of the matter is these four are people who disagree but they're working hard they are approaching the matter in good faith and deeply committed to their view of the law and the constitution

and you can forget they are trying to get right just as much as you are. sometimes you will disagree but you all try to do the same thing which this to interpret and apply the law as best you can. >> in terms of the voting process, you vote last quick. >> i do. >> you don't have a choice you like that? give me your thoughts. >> we sit around a big table with assigned seats increase speak in order seniority down to what i am is the junior justice we all speak and we vote they can change in a single conference period overtime but still at

the time it comes to me all of my colleagues have tentatively voted. >> it is better to be number nine than number seven or eight or six because you do have the ability to listen to everybody to sometimes you can say this is what i hear and maybe there is a way we can reach agreement. sometimes it is like a drumroll. [laughter] the especially if it is four / four what will you say? for it is better but honestly if you could choose u.s. issues to be some of

the senior justices because they set the table for everything else. >> the senior justice in and the majority makes the assignment usually the senior justice makes the assignment. >> so just turning to opinions we know they like to write and that is or that began so what is your goal with the opinion writing? sometimes it isn't always the clearest laugh laugh so what is your philosophy. >> can be incredibly complicated and not come intuitive i try very hard to make a readable and

understandable by ordinary people but those who will put in the time and effort and energy to read an opinion i hope i will be able to be understood you don't want to dump that down too much not act a second grade level the past be serious c. never want to oversimplify but where i can write something bred not writing at the level of the complexity of that material but i managed to achieve both claire and complex things of that is what i try to do. that takes a law of pork the city more editing you do the better a get the really

believe that with a legal right thing it is hard when you try to express in a way people can understand. so why spend a law of time and thinking about that thing and not just that you should be able to a understand but what i'm trying to do is figure out why we've reached a result and if i can tell story in a way to say that's right that is why we should have reached that result might do feel that here is my story why the court was right or wrong to reach that decision if i really wanted to move people, i get it. if you do that via analogy

your hypothetical, there are different techniques to get people to say why this is so right off or so wrong. five. >> and with the law students there are page limits do you think moyers have to write to the end of the page limit brecht's if they pick up a brief and it is not i am happy because we think the only reason it goes to the and is because they were trying to get to the and. why do that? i think they are positively inclined to the briefs that don't necessarily take every word that is allowed to them >> less is more.

>> if i tell my clerks you have a seven page lament -- and learned they will say it is hard to knock it down to seven pages i say then bank about what is important that is in bad thing to think about. >> q have other interest lawyer rather as to be a spokesperson for the law clerk in the cafeteria greg. >> so when you talk about you did these important things and promoted public interest but honestly if you read or ask a typical harvard lost in what is the best thing the dean did they would say free coffee. [laughter]

when i got to the court one of the things that goes with the junior justice roll it is you serve on doc cafeteria committee i think it is a form of hazing. [laughter] the chief justice thinks you're probably hot stuff will put you on the cafeteria committee so based upon my experience is that this is a good opportunity because one of the things i learned is you can do a law. so i did a little survey what people wanted most of what they wanted was a frozen yogurt machine. [laughter] so i got to a frozen yogurt machine and to write opinions and this is nice

but i am frozen yogurt justice. [laughter] [applause] according to justice ginsberg you also have the best jab and prostatic. >> one of the things things, actually i am not negative yeah jovanovich of exercise. [laughter] i find it boring but the trader has got me into boxing and kick boxing which is fantastic and i love it. it is great exercise. >> curious to play basketball. >> last week went down to louisville kentucky to the

of franchise law school and the things that the town that is famous for, i did some events that the law school they gave me a gift at the end it was the best gift i have never gotten the went to the boxing gloves from of, and all the and now i have mohamad of the boxing gloves. [laughter] >> as we wrap up. >> there are so many more questions and think we covered most of them. so what are your final words , not final final for. [laughter]

what comment would deal like to say or what 81 your legacy to beat greg. >> i will leave that to other people. to the historians and the writers what is important for me is just that negative my all and work as hard as icahn to make sure in every case dyad gotten their right . to the degree that i feel it is necessary and there were cruelly hard on my opinion

for the majorities in defense. then i think the legacy will take care of itself just to work hard to set high standards in terms of the quality what people say later that they will say later. >> there is a piece of advice? denied justice stevens said one of the things about this job like this, my career has been one of jumping around allot after five years stretches thinking about how to do a five-year job and over decades is a different experience. justice stevens has served 35 years to say every year he felt somewhat he was

learning that year. at how even and done it was year number 28 he was learning new things they need new skills to there's always a way to keep learning even in a job you have done a long time. that is incredibly important advice i am just in all of my colleagues they have little the court for a law of years but they still think hard about every case i think everybody on the court does that even those of them there long time. i am a huge fan of my colleagues for that reason. there is nobody there on autopilot. it could be the 23rd time i have seen the issue by

will think there is hard as i did the first time. >> i said she talked about her parents to remind her everyday of the impact of public service to pray every day she will live up to that example i think we can all agree she has exceeded that example with those expectations to have a huge impact on public education. thank you so much. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] >> when we ended up with the

constitution after the articles of confederation have failed. if this was wednesday i would be having a wonderful ice-cream and then tell me where you were from then we would share those recipes. >> what is your favorite ice-cream? >> when i has been and is there i served peppermint on occasion unpopular rises strawberry i.c.e. cream and waster i.c.e. cream which is not as well-received. >>

>> also with new year's and to all day bouquet of flowers rouge she did not have to shake hands but i showed 3,000 hands and then re would entertain people in the east room if any one person is responsible roosevelt was magnificent believe it or not we had

2,000 people in that room. i don't know how they did but the work got done and then to start the trend of musicals before that it was a stodgy place. magnificent of the lighthouse.

>> bobby kennedy's last words were all on to chicago the next day he was due to meet with richard daley. his son was chief of staff to barack obama he said 70 percent chance he would have endorsed bobby kennedy for president.

if he would have beat out nixon it would be a different place with racial tensions and international discord. and then tried to address them 50 years ago. [inaudible conversations]

>> good morning to the third offset conference here holding today to talk about what the third offset is the progress and the challenges going forward and what baby in storer for that third offset so i am pleased to have with us for three of the architects of the implementation that you may not have heard of. some capability as the third offset.

now we will have each panel speak about the third offset then we will have a conversation how to think about that to shape government activity. >> and the vice-chairman joint chiefs of staff and to my immediate laugh to the principal director intelligence. so the main architect can you talk a little bit about when you first conceived the issues? what is what you were seeking higher dues see that as a frame to implement the department's activities greg. >> first of all, i cannot

rarely take credit i trace that thinking back at 2012 with the deputy secretary of defense it was motivated of what i will talk about followed by a very important presentation given to the national security council of the growing threats to the space constellation. so the job of the deputy secretary the primary job and as the action group

tries to make a cohesive program. so but it is focused on conventional deterrence. it is designed to strengthen u.s. terence to avoid any major confrontation. it is focused at the operational level of four. the theater leveller campaign level. to have some from that operational wobble because the historical perspective that is the surest way to underwrite the offset is

that to you start to is your competitors. did danske abilities you have the conventional. >> not adversaries but competitors because they develop advanced capabilities. and the where we are projecting power a car if he still might but those that are outside the land mass

the when the potential competitors and bev and shoot mondesi have reached parity of the theater wide battle that works. of silicon see what is happening to control communications and computers to have a sense of what is happening and what they would like to achieve and then you have logistic san support that keeps though holding running. and that is approaching parity with us.

in conventional terms we want to make shirt we can extend our and vintage and third to put a law of money in the counter network operations. so they spend a law of money on cybercapability in electronic warfare capabilities because the space constellations is a very important part of the ability to put these together. so those three things they might be expected to fight that is a law of counter network operations. what we refer to. >> it is the in here trying

to improve congressional deterrence with the best way to go about it. the third offset does not have a destination. it is a journey. and to exploit those entrances into their battle networks that we believe will strengthen congressional deterrence. . .

to get to your questions but again it's not a unified field theory it is focused on one thing strengthening the deterrence to make sure the board doesn't happen. >> i want to get your perspective from the combat si side. >> i will make a couple points to expand. third the offset isn't an answer, it's a question. it questions our ability to offset the advantages we see emerging in the potential competitors for this and i

always describe it if it were a fixed point in space i would navigate those into the joint requirements oversight council and mandate them in every program that exists and impose them through the chair man on all of the services except it's not an answer, it's a question. by asking the question repeatedly, what are the advantages that our adversaries are accruing overtime, what threats do they pose and can addressing those threats strengthen conventional deterrence, i think we are asking the right question. the wii to take technologies and ideas and turn them into procedures is through operational experimentation that begins with designing concepts, testing them and ultimately testing them in exercises. from an operational perspective, the journey that we are on has

the potential to vastly increase the effectiveness of the conventional forces. but we have to ask the right questions and experiment with the right techniques and procedures and disseminate those in doctrine to the forces and partners and allies and friends and figure out how to offset the capability that all of our competitors are bringing to the battle space which is in simple terms long-range precision strike at volume. in space, cyberspace, in the air, on land and on sea. we can step back and say that we invented it and that would be true that everyone who wishes to compete with us has read our doctrine. they've watched us and they've analyzed our strengths and they

are reflecting what we are good at back on us yet figured out how to offset that in the operational battle space and i will stop there because i'm really interested in your questions. >> if one thing is not like the other, that presents the intelligence community and i would love your perspective about how you all have come to be partnered in the defense department and how you think about the process. >> from th >> from the moment the department started talking about the third offset, it's deeply iy resonated in the intelligence community. we share a world in which the threats are changing and which countermeasures are always at hand and. the routing the national security advances. by that tim the time that we dea new capability and increasingly with cyber from the way we could see the capability, but

competitors are working to counter that new capability. so in my view, if we are not driving our own offset, we are receiving ground and losing our ability from the oval office to the war fighters and so i just don't believe it not changing is an option that we have. >> thanks very much. let me if i can hope to revoke a conversation on the topic. you all see each other in various venues but we don't always get to hear the dialogue so we hope to get a little piece

of that today. if i could start with you, one of the things people would say is that is all well and good to look at russia and china but there's other issues going on. there are many other operational challenges out there. what is your response in the water defense strategy? >> i knew the question was going to come. this is the kind of question that we've received throughout the department. it's always good to be the straight man. so, i would like you to look at the top first when i say we are injecting and autonomy into the grid we are looking at five different things, a thomas

learning systems that can crunch the big data and see patterns humans simply cannot see and they can reveal those to the humans and they affect the icy. i'm sure stephanie can talk about that but they were impacted. remember the collaborative decision-making is providing information for the advanced visualization. a couple with machine to communications and allows humans to make more timely relevant decisions and we refer to that as human being machine. its machines using humans to allow them to make better decisions. assisted human operations, this is providing us much information to the individual so it cannot

allow them to make better decisions at every level and it's also wearable electronics, disposable sensors. that's what we mean by human operations. advanced human machine combat teaming you see this all over the place with those working together. finally, the network labeled as autonomous weapons and high-speed weapons like directed energy and hypersonic's. all of those things will be injected into the center grid and the affecting the sticks and support allowing the performance impact, and again it's not about the kurds technology per se.

but he goes through saying here is the requiremenhere's the reqo doctrine developers to say this is how we will use this to exercise safe for that is what we are talking about in the third offset. why wouldn't you focus. this is a white board. he stepped up his special operators on a particular target and he said i need to bring the entire power of the battle network to me. at this point in time to

accomplish this effect on the battlefield and he sketched out. i need at all connected. the five areas of the way up to the operational level of war this is completely

much like railroads and telegraph being driven in the commercial sector. autonomy is changing all of our lives like the vice chair said at an astounding rate sometimes we don't even notice it. this will be a world of fast followers. if it isn't so much autonomy it is in invested in the battleground terms to work better than the potential competitors and we believe we do have an advantage on the operational level at this time

and we might be able to have an advantage if we move to the operational organizational constructs that we may only have an advantage for five years or so you start thinking about what you want to create the next five years. it's like a competitive business where the market is constantly changing and you have to adapt. we know that it will improve. we know that competitors will conclude at the same thing in the world of fast followers as long as you are a fast eater you have an advantage but you have to think about what is the next step when we achieve parity. >> to pick up on the plates of cars that can drive themselves,

that's interesting but it barely scratches the surface of what could happen if every car was perfect the network, if everybody subscribed to a network that optimized sarcast sarcastic, my guys wouldn't have to go through whit -- delights t me here on time. having spent time with people who think about artificial intelligence and autonomous automation, every one of them would tell you we are barely scratching the surface. we are only beginning to learn the promise of peace for the future and it's a question and answer if we walk into systems that continue to bring new

information tended networks, we are doomed to singular autonomous things and we won't be able to adapt. the heart of the question is yes and we have to evolve with it. it's born of technologies that are 40-years-old. we are not going to be able to sustain in the environment where software applications allow them to adapt quickly so we have to sort out how deeply we are going to look into the problem and predict what the capabilities

are going to be and how we can make the infrastructure. while you subscribe to an open architecture the answer is always of course. we have to have open architectures so i would say wonderful here is the application i would like for you to make it work useful to the service that ordered it. we can't do that. it is an open architecture that the only way we can do that is to find a resilient architecture to which all can describe.

>> asking that question is like -- we are at the beginning and we can't see all the possible places that could take us but we need to allow it to be explored. see what this could mean and then move it if it is the brush that should have burned. there's anothethere is another e coming hopefully. >> my question is the first

benefited from the act of 47. both will help realize all the advantages? >> the offsets were not just the product of changing the policy apparatus in fact the changes have been a result of what's happening around us so i would suggest a big part of the first was the fact that we found. that posed some questions for the security leadership.

in the mid-70s we have realized precision would get us to a different e. creation and by the way some of our competitors say we create nuclear effects with conventional weapons. there is a huge difference in what it means. that means we don't have to deploy all the power in the battle space and by the way you wasn't just precision in the network that gave indications to make it useful and we reorganized around it.

we had these services but we didn't have a construct to encourage back. so gold water. last week i found myself describing the defense department as a diner and that has already been cut and if you polish it all you will make it do is make it brighter.

thanks for arranging this discussion. where do allies and partners fit into this an handheld will and e without giving away the goodies. >> we have many here and this is what we would say in addition to the advantage going back to the question there's an enormous competitive advantage and it takes all of the armed forces.

it's been 30 years sinc since gr nichols and our competitors tried to copy some of this. the third thing you hit on its our allies that we believe the strategies are essential to not only our security but global security if you compare us. we've been talking with our partners and allies into the way we describe it as a coalition friendly an and an infantry battalion or armored division.

cyberspace, airspace, on the cd, it is this interoperable discussion and so far all of them have been. i would argue it is the current concept. integrating all this on behalf

a. it just requires the additional per to think about. it is engaging and how can we best help each other and we are doing all this structural work to make that possible largely in the idea that we are structuring the system so we know. of naval intelligence there are a lot of pieces to the puzzle.

some of the challenges that i have absorbed is how do you do it. how do you keep if they are not getting what they need. >> we will hea would hear how hs tackled the problem. we will determine that return on investmenthe return oninvestmene operators. the second offset. then within a short period of

time the sofia to staff was completely unhinged. they won't say it looks like a return on investment if we do this and then we had five the developers and it will be the feedback from this how it improves the performance of the joint force that will tell us the return on investment, a lot of tests and demonstrations.

if they come back and say this is the real deal. she's still become a smart, resilient, and ten times more lethal than any other of the same class. we have a history in the

department. advertise them as a success. when they are echoing back to me in their workspaces in their unit they are seeing the benef benefit. when we have articles in our

professional journals and commanders responding into the document centers. we wouldn't have gps today, and herald brown. it just so happens he was from a helicopter in a really dicey situation.

what is the return on investment on that but when we get into operations like desert storm, be able to do the guided musicians through the weather the return on investment is when they say this is how we will win in the future so we have to be careful. i'm afraid we have to make that the last word. this has been a helpful panel having to bring up. after i thank the panel i ask

everyone to stay where they are and we will switch over quickly but i do want to thank december -- what we hope will be a discussion about the assets of pleased join me in a round of applause. [applause] more from the csi as confidence from defense secretary ashton carter talks about the military and in defense of creations. this is one hour.

a 30 minute introduction is like a 32nd. there's no one better positioned to meet department right now. he just came back from a grueling trip. would you please welcome the department of defense. [applause]

i want to commend my deputy defense, thank you for holding the fort down next week. i will speak about that but of course in the speech. being more innovative is critical to the success of our military and defense department. today we have the finest that's

more experienced or innovative that's why the military is second to none and its effect every american ought to be proud of but it's also a fact that the excellence isn't a birthright, it isn't guaranteed. we have to earn it again and again. our technology, operations, organizations of all of our people. right now it is imperative because we went through a fiercely competitive world.

competitions with each other and terrorists and other malefacto malefactors. most technology of consequence originated in america and was sponsored by the government and the department of defense. today much more technology is commercial and the broad piece is global. others have been trying to catch up with the breakthroughs that have made the military more advanced. much is commercial leading to

additional. against this background were confronted a security environment that also dramatically different from the last generation and even before that. the military is countering the prospect of russian aggression. we are managing historic change in the asia-pacific. the most consequential. we are strengthening in the nuclear provocations. we are checking aggression and influence on the golf.

we are accelerating the search command lasting defeat of isis, destroying it everywhere else metastasized as we protect our homeland and people and at the same time we are preparing to contend with an uncertain futu future. we don't have the luxury of choosing. as the world changes and complexity increases we have to change how we invest i in a fig, i'll put it as an organization and attract and nourish talent. the advantages we expect to drive from each cycle today will not last.

it needed more accessible for competitors. the race was characterized by simply having more, bigger or better weapons. today is characterized by the variables of speed and agility. it depends on who can innovate faster than anybody else and even changed the game. it matters how we buy them and how creatively we can adapt to them.

i've been so intent to not only plant the seeds for a couple that we think will be determinative in giving a future. more of those in the moment but also in our operations in organizations and talent. we had help from washington think tanks like csi as, from the defense labs and industry partners and many who understand and are not in the community now

but understand the need for the mission o for national security and want to help and all of us. i don't want to focus on that. get him a topic of this particular conference and i will start with technology. the strategic imperative is well known to those who have been paying attention and many of y you, high-end military to which he is diffused sometimes becoming available.

our own reliance on systems like satellite. to stay ahead of these threats we are pushing the envelope and that new technology like davis lands. the artificial intelligence machine learning and much more.