. >> darpa is doing a great job of turning that around, better than others.when she gets done, most of her people are focused on technologies that are going to solve the problem. you mentioned the stuxnet attack. that was a lot of very smart people doing a lot of very smart people work. and once it's done, it ocan't used again practically. >> right. >> so it's not like a weapons system where you can put all that intelligence into creating something that you can use over and over again, now we've got an environment where the tanks in the next war are actually going to be the people because if you don't have better people handling your information controls than the other guys does, you lose. >> is that the fundamental change that we need, phyllis, is to fundamentally change how we think about the problem in order to be able to fix it? >> i think we have to look at our adversary. our adversary is fast, they have no intellectual property boundaries, no legal boundaries, often state funding and they simply execute. we -- >> with vast armies that are auxiliary sup

foreign investors especially those in our case who come from the european union are used to working on a darpa to. put a person on the street w. general membership will not be just something they'll read about in the news but it will mean lower prices removing trade barriers between states increases competition prices of afforded goods drop and the massive companies also broke quicker with foreign markets opening up. for workers of these metallurgical company it all looks like a win win situation their most recent project is the north stream pipeline should they enter international markets they'll face very little competition. and this is lost so much the largest loss in russia's south producing harvester crushers is what a book is full for months ahead and workers who conspired. but the head of the company has a rather different outlook to that of the w t o cheerleaders with oil and gas will be in demand even without entering the. well agricultural. egg recall chu will be among the hardest hit sectors but experts say the domestic automotive industry will be the one to undergo most he will. th

need to know what a balance a budget budget amendment would do here's shine some light on this is so darpa mahanta editorial fellow with mother jones magazine so arthur welcome having me great to have you on so let's for people to know let's define what a balanced budget amendment is. it's really just as simple as it sounds in one sense it would require the federal government to spend no more than it takes in every year now the ways in which this is radical or that the amendment would restrict the government spending whatever it whatever it takes and for that it would restrict the government spending based on what it spent in the previous year now paul ryan who's the republican budget chairman he drew up he he had a budget that was pretty much slammed by liberals by democrats as being a pretty a pretty drastic budget in terms of cost and items that republicans and some republicans to. just give you a sense that budget would be unconstitutional under the sort of balanced budget amendment that republicans are pitching now this is radical that's all right but this is radical polar and so ther

importance of this kind of website and let's not forget about the origins of the internet because that was darpa net back in the one nine hundred eighty s. it was set up as a system for communicating in a time of nuclear attack so that no one senator i'm could actually have taken out i was interrupting if i may just jump in for a moment just just give us a clear yet are is this more about sex charges or is it more about his whistle blowing activities what is certainly very similar isn't it to the dominique strauss can sexting it seems to me there isn't any real basis for this as we heard there's not even been charges over in sweden and so yes it's a spurious attempt to shut down what is one of the most important media outlets in the world right now and it's like i say a disruption campaign but the old fashioned what i was saying about the internet is actually what happens is with now the internet as it is the internet detects censorship as damage and it routes around that censorship and that's what julian assange is able to do with wiki leaks and he's stopping him now with this what i think is q

according to the director of the defense advance research project agency or darpa, the research arm ofhe pentagon, the government needs more and better options to protect the country from cyber assaults. she said this, "malicious cyber attacks are not merely an existential to bits and bites, they are a real threat to physical systems, including our military systems." she adds that the first goal is to prevent war. but she adds that policy makers must protect civil liberties. they've pro o posed a boost in funding from $120 million to $208 million. carol, the pentagon is also calling for half a billion dollars in funding for cyber security over the next five years. so this is a major push. >> wow. let talk approximate this asteroid flying close to earth. i assume it's going to miss us. why is it important? >> there is no danger here. let's say that up front. an asteroid the size of an aircraft carrier, pretty big. wields by the earth tonight. they've been tracking this asteroid. it's called yu 55. every day since friday. they'll continue to watch it, especially tonight. the best place t

what about microsoft's research or apple research for barbara --dar --darpa? >> guest: that is a government agency that provides funding for various kinds of research and i believe they still support a lot of interesting. surge -- research without her together operations. they have been under financial pressure along with the rest of the government funding of science in the last few years which i think is a tragedy. microsoft has the research group at apple has the research group. to some extent they have tried to finance york research without obvious application to the company bottom line. how successful they have that i cannot say. >> host: next call for mr gleick from mega in washington d.c.. >> caller: this is in that. [talking over each other] >> caller: the cross pollination of ideas. my father was on a team that invented synthetic rubber and new mr. winslow who was with bell labs. they were good friends so they shared ideas as a child. i don't know what they might have been but there was something about that encouraging environment of cross pollination

and so we created through darpa, arpa research that produced this communications network, and then the private sector saw the opportunity and a whole bunch of very creative people rushed in and made the internet what it is today. overturning the rules, as the c.r.a. proposes to do, would put the very open architecture that has created this extraordinary agent of communication and commerce and family communication and all these things that it's done for business, it would put it at risk and discourage investment in companies at the edge of the interneat really could be the -- internet that really could be the next google or the next amazon. overturning these rules would actually hurt our competitiveness and economic growth and they would diffuse the creative energy that has driven the internet to be what it is today. because if you overturn the internet today, you take the reality of the internet and you put it in the hands of the gatekeepers. everything that goes over the internet today goes either through your telephone at home or television or whatever, through cable, out of your hou

what i encourage though is we keep in mind the federal role if we think about darpa for instance, is how do we leverage basic technology innovations and not get the federal government involved in trying to recommend particular models of implementation. i hope that's helpful. >> very good, very comprehensive. >> as far as in regards to what's positive about it, i think first of all in your statements made that no child left behind was ineffective, and i certainly have to agree with that, and think of this as not the reauthorization of no child left behind, but the reauthorization of esea. as an educator, just the connotation of the term "no child left behind" it really is demoralizing to us at this point because there's so much focus on teaching -- i mean, testing, testing, testing that we have no time to teach, and it really has become that way within this school. working with gifted education, and i run into this all the time because things i want to do with my students, the teachers don't want me to take them out of the classroom because they are addressing questions and then are t

darpa has been as successful as any and it has been replicated in the intelligence version and the honen security program. that has had some success. those agencies always put a high technical challenge and give a fixed time line and fund high- risk projects and see a banking comes out of it. incutel is an attempt to go further upstream and put in ideas and funding at an earlier stage and see if silicon valley and other groups could come up with technical solutions to some of the problems we face. i think we have to keep working it and take a different techniques. some things come from inspired individuals who just push it and other things tend to come in other tocomeincutel, i'm not sure what they're batting average was but i am sure it was 50% or less. your basic concern is correct and i think i worry in the budget keeping an amount of federal funding that can address that. those are programs that are generally on the chopping block first. i would second your idea that we need to keep doing things like that and doing more of them. >> we has been -- we have spent nine minutes so can we

darpa has been as successful as any and it has been replicated in the intelligence version and the honen security program. that has had some success. those agencies always put a high technical challenge and give a fixed time line and fund high-risk projects and see a banking comes out of it. -- see if anything comes out of it? . incutel is an attempt to go further upstream and put in ideas and funding at an earlier stage and see if silicon valley and other groups could come up with technical solutions to some of the problems we face. i think we have to keep working it and take a different techniques. some things come from inspired individuals who just push it and other things tend to come notther tocomeincutel, i'm sure what they're batting average was but i am sure it was 50% or less. but there were some good things, so that is good. your basic concern is correct and i think i worry in the budget keeping an amount of federal funding that can address that. those are programs that are generally on the chopping block first. i would second your idea that we need to keep doing things like th