thinking having the nsf with a subsidiary national science tech foundation working in concert with darpa which is the analog defense agency and it would be responsible for funding fundamental research related to ai and other cutting-edge areas like i mentioned like quantum computing. it would also have a board of directors but the key is over five years for the federal government to invest $100 billion into funding this research. and the group would fund it. just like nsf does now and goes to companies or special government agencies in the defense department or not. that the kind of research that needs to be done with a long revenue stream to fund graduate scholarships and fellowships and post doctorate support in targeted research areas and the development of testbed type of facilities before you get to the pure research. this is just a discussion draft but has gotten a lot of support from the people i have shown it to. we will do better dollar for dollar but if they outspend us which they are doing now we will fall behind. so now this idea has support of some people very close to the p

i we looking for partnerships,, simmons once we have with darpa.we work for darpa for years, parted with a month hypersonics and distribute leo so that works quite well. if they steal of agency works with us the way darpa does we know how to do that model. [inaudible] a briefing at her what the oh doing? >> and maybe just their busy, having to go argue. they haven't -- maybe first you need funding to go do a program before you talk to the acquisition person who is about executing funding. >> have you been successful in attracting this venture capital matching for phase two programs you been talking about. >> is yes. like surprisingly, surprisingly successful. the first round that we had done called strategic small business innovative research brought in, if we award all of them, over $1 billion of private capital. i think that's great for our first round. we are hoping that if we are able to do some of these awards and start teaching the air force that when you put money on the table with the process that private investors believe in, you can start

with darpa, we are priming the pump with a lot of important areas. whether that is training or in models and simulation that help format the recruiting in a number of different areas. another important component of this is the it modernization. the kernels, is critical but it comes embedded within a larger environment of sites where. it is often very times difficult because you have security clearances and appropriate certifications. but all elements of that piece. who that combination of successful individual experiments and trial runs to build that the mill area deep up your loophole. but also the systemic change to make it easier to have wider adoption of these technologies. >> is time who us to finish up. my objective was to put to bed, this notion that somehow silicon valley would it work with the military. and we clearly seen examples small companies and large companies and we can can send her to forward and build this collective between the private and the public partnerships. can you sort of summarize sort of the key take away that he would o

thinking having the nsf with a subsidiary national science tech foundation working in concert with darpa which is the analog defense agency and it would be responsible for funding fundamental research related to ai and other cutting-edge areas like i mentioned like quantum computing. it would also have a board of directors but the key is over five years for the federal government to invest $100 billion into funding this research. and the group would fund it. just like nsf does now and goes to companies or special government agencies in the defense department or not. that the kind of research that needs to be done with a long revenue stream to fund graduate scholarships and fellowships and post doctorate support in targeted research areas and the development of testbed type of facilities before you get to the pure research. this is just a discussion draft but has gotten a lot of support from the people i have shown it to. we will do better dollar for dollar but if they outspend us which they are doing now we will fall behind. so now this idea has support of some people very close to the p

having the nsf have a subsidiary and stf, national science tech foundation, working in concert with darpa which would be sort of the analog defense agency. and it would be responsible for funding fundamental research related to ai and some other cutting-edge areas like i mentioned, quantum computing and g5 and robotics. o e nsf would also have a board of directors for this new agency, this combined group would have a board of directors to oversee them, but the key would be over five years for the federal government to invest $100 billion into funding this research into the group would fund it. some of it would go to universities just like nsf does now. some of it could go to companies. some of it could even go to special government agencies and the defense department or not. but the kind of research that needs to be done but have a long revenue stream. we would also fund undergraduate scholarships for graduate fellowship, trainees and post-doctorate support in the targeted research areas and the development of the testbed type of facilities that would be before you get to the fewer resear

he could go to darpa or dod and say find us a solution. he knew the architecture of darpa cannot produce it. he saw nc state. finally a solution in 90 days. they had a solution in syria that completely eliminated the recreational drones. >> i would like a copy for virginia. >> we can't take that example and exercise it to where we do it at every commercial airport in america because we can't deploy technology even though we got it. >> this is something we are wrestling with right now. we both got fairly obsessed about the challenges of china. it's a great nation with a great history. has donepresident xi with reconsolidation of power with the party, you look at how the people of hong kong are being treated, we may be dealing with a china that will pose an economic threat unlike anything we have ever faced in our lifetimes. 2025 document, technology areas where they hope to dominate. we have grown up in a world we assumed if it wasn't invented in america where the west, we set the rules and the protocols. china is now setting the rules and

darpa had headquarters in an mit building called ted square. .. i'm sworn to secrecy.id later find out, i actually found a copy of a letter written by someone at dead square thinking, , for my dad service, that he would work on it secretive project. that project with one of the projects they came out of darpa funding and the development of the technology actually was the technology that became pretty much the foundation for the modern-day internet. i know the government was involved because it was the government providing funds for the research in order to create the technology which now tech companies like google, apple, microsoft for using without what was done in cambridge none of what we're seeing, your cell phones would not be available. twitter wouldn't be around. none of that would be around. so yes, there was a clear understanding, and cia was there because they understood the one to get out in front of that technology because it would be very useful for intelligence and that is how intelligence would be gathered in the future. i don't know if my dad is a work

the technology was really important part of the first project funded by a government agency called darpad it had headquarters in the mit building 545 main street cambridge. ibm and general electric. so my dad occasionally i asked this question my dad was a have to go away i cannot tell you where i'm going and what i'm doing and i'm sworn to secrecy. and then i see a copy that he went to work on a secret project cp 67 that was one of the projects that came out of the darpa funding and that was the technology that was the foundation for the modern-day internet. because the government provides the funds with google and microsoft and what they are using. the cell phones would not be available twitter's not around. and to get out in front of that technology and how you gather that intelligence in the future progress don't know if my dad worked for cia but i do know when i went to ibm eventually i got a job working on cp 67 cms. that it was interesting i was doing the same work my dad had been doing. but intel 1974 the cia asked if i wanted to work for them. i said no but it made me question i

got to go a step further we're going to go into telepathic communications ok one of the things that darpa figured out a while back is how to read minds and what they did was they could put a little piece of tape around the this particular part of the throat and there are micro vocalisations that occur when people think they can actually figure out what people are thinking because you are seeing things even though your mouth is a movie the 2 are connected now have you ever been looking at your laptop or thought about something maybe you've said hey i'll go benny died and i was a grave insurance or or whatever. eventual the i may be paranoid but just because i'm paranoid doesn't mean i know it was after me i swear to you i will be thinking something just thinking something and it shows i'm now when this happens remember they want to know everything they take the data you put it in some huge place and some desert and anything they want to pull and call and coley from you they've got it including what you're thinking where you're going where you've been the people that you know they will have

harpo would be tasked to come up with out of the box ways to handle problems much like darpa the defense advanced research projects agency does for the military one of those proposed is something called say oh oh yes for stopping apparent fatal abends by help in helping overcome mental extremes a lot of these calls for exploring whether technology including phones and smart watches can be used to detect when mentally ill people are about to turn violent. you know. this is all. right. i mean well we all really love to know when we're going to have a bad moment or when. we're talking about teenagers or you know people outside of a certain social norm or a certain social subset in which they're getting a regular mental health screenings or they're getting regular mental health care here's an idea how about you just provide more health care and mental health care to the communities in which we keep seeing a rise in domestic terrorism and then when we see these things happening why not i don't know provide the services that we pay our taxes for because that's the hard long road easier just to

you think of darpa which laid the predicate later for the internet. these don't always succeed, what if we don't try, if we don't invest those resources we are sure to be outpaced by other sort of state capitalist models. >> you've been going back to the middle east now for a minute, you've been one of the strong critics of saudi arabia in the senate, and had spoken very seriously about wanting to put some conditions on the aid and have a a stronger response to violations of human rights there. i know you went to saudi, you visited the region earlier this fall. did you come away from that with any change in perspective, or where do you think we are now with saudi arabia? >> every time i travel, my perspective changes, which is why i find travel so valuable and spent more time in us and i will continue to travel but you're right, i have been critical of saudi arabia. i have given criticism where criticism is due, and that given wholesome credit where that is due. on the one and the saudi is in bs in particular is really trying to modernize his country

were dropping explosives and he saw that as the number one threat to his troops, he did not go to darpa or the dod and said find a solution, he knew the arcti arcs cannot produce it. he went to the lab and said find me a solution in 90 days that a solution in syria completely eliminated the risk of recreational drugs. >> advocate copy for virginia. >> we cannot take that example and exercise where we make safe every commercial airport in america. because we cannot deploy technology even though we have it. >> one other thing that we are wrestling with right now we both have barely been obsessed about the challenges from china, china is a great nation, a great history but what president xi has done the last four or five years in terms of recent consolidation with the commonest party but we may be dealing with a china that will propose an economic threat unlike anything we've ever faced in her lifetime were china has laid out on the 2025 document, the technology they hope to dominate and we have all gone up and just assume it wasn't invented in america even if it was somewhere in the west

industry and hard-working patriots answer the call and then we rallied the best and brightest to create darpa and nasa and took control of the space race. mastering ai has a similar vision and commitment. we are no stranger to these challenges america has risen to the task before and we must do so again but we need your help. we need the full force of american intellect and ingenuity and your leadership and your vision to maine taking a strategic edge to pioneer solutions for collective security thank you for your time and i look forward to our discussion. thank you. [applause] >> thank you secretary for your thoughtful remarks it's clear you in the department have been thinking about ai and what it offers our military and enabling our adversaries. i would like to pull upon your comments thank you for sharing so how the dod could be communicating with industry challenging them over national security issues. >> we are reaching out in a number of ways to posting notices through forums and think tanks sessions and reaching out to academics directly for go we were talking before hand as secretary

but after president trump took trump took office he tried to rescind the government program known as darpa however a lower court has been siding with these young immigrants saying that they do offer a significant contribution to the country and in fact holding shows that the american public has sympathy for dr recipients as well president trump has gone back and forth on the matter at times saying that he wants to help utilize the status of these young immigrants but this morning on twitter having only harsh words writing many of the people in dhaka no longer very young are far from angels some are very tough hardened criminals in fact none of the darker recipients have serious criminal records that's a factor that would have disqualified them from the government program in the 1st. and now he's hosting 8 100000 young immigrants are taking their fight to the u.s. supreme court. a former u.s. president jimmy carter is recovering from surgery are getting admitted to hospital in atlanta the procedure for the 95 year old was to relieve pressure on his brain from briefly bleeding after a series

darpa found out it was actually counterproductive for those committed into the ideology. incubators ise only amplifying the message of those that are more prone to actually progress to violent extremism. they are migrating to telegram or have lower numbers of followers, but the grievances -- they don't allow us to speak -- it is harming the narrative that if we can't speak, but his will act violent on the street. >> that is a really good point i would like to expand upon. that is one of the things we used as recruiters in the movement too, to say -- i have tested this theory myself. on facebook, i was banned from facebook because of my name alone. postedup accounts and like vacation pictures, nothing pro right. and then had somewhat anonymously -- there is counterintelligence work like this on all different levels. i could go on for five hours about that but this is one little example. on facebook, we set that profile up. we just had pictures, my girl at the beach or family. send an anonymous message from a different email address to facebook and say, hey, the head of the

strikes me that part of the problem we have here in this case but also with thing it is like daca and darparight? in terms of whoever's in the white house, doesn't matter to me, let's have clarity in the law. let's not expect bureaucrats, respectfully, that those in the agencies to be making policies on the margins of the law that congress passes. so if we have in the case of dapa and daca when i was the first assistant general of texas we litigated and went to the united states supreme court, the question was whether or not conferring status and benefits to a class of individuals is something you could plausibly say is actual prosecutorial discretion. it's ridiculous for congress to be building a policy on the back of asking bureaucrats to make those decisions when we hold the pen, and we could decide what laws we want to put in place. would you agree with that? the. >> yes. you're not building a a policy, you're telling us to implement a policy. you're not giving us standards, you're asking us for standards that don't exist in law. and as i said earlier, pass a law, i promise you, we will