Paul I'd like to begin with a basic question in that everyone these days is talking about artificial intelligence or AI. What exactly is it? It's a massive barrier to entry. And the technology's very, very difficult to build. So for example, in extreme ultraviolet lithography, the most advanced use for the most cutting edge chips, one company in the world, ASML, has a complete monopoly on this. So more recently, we've seen Japan and Netherlands say that they're coming on board with these restrictions. There's a lot that we still don't know about the details of them, although more details are leaking out. But if the three countries are able to stay together, China will really struggle to catch up in chip production. Despite examples of AI’s stupendous capacities in simulated combat, described in detail in Four Battlegrounds, it’s this kind of unpredictable behavior that raises the question of whether AI should be anywhere near lethal weaponry, or decisions where lives are on the line. “Militaries are working hard to adopt artificial intelligence. They’re largely focused on near term issues, and I do worry there is some degree of wishful thinking about our ability to control AI systems,” Scharre says. “It’s very possible that we end up in a place where countries are building and deploying quite dangerous AI weapons, and I think that’s something we need to think about and guard against.”

Scharre knows enough about the US military that I didn't detect flaws in his expertise there. He has learned enough about AI to avoid embarrassing mistakes. I.e. he managed to avoid claims that have been falsified by an AI during the time it took to publish the book. Scharre previously worked in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) where he played a leading role in establishing policies on unmanned and autonomous systems and emerging weapons technologies. He led the Department of Defense (DoD) working group that drafted DoD Directive 3000.09, establishing the department’s policies on autonomy in weapon systems. He also led DoD efforts to establish policies on intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance programs and directed energy technologies. Scharre was involved in the drafting of policy guidance in the 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance, 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, and secretary-level planning guidance. A new industrial revolution has begun. Like mechanization or electricity before it, artificial intelligence will touch every aspect of our lives—and cause profound disruptions in the balance of global power, especially among the AI superpowers: China, the United States, and Europe. Autonomous weapons expert Paul Scharre takes readers inside the fierce competition to develop and implement this game-changing technology and dominate the future. Well, in computing hardware or compute as folks in the AI industry talk about it, the U.S. has a commanding lead over China. China has a huge vulnerability in that they are highly dependent on foreign chips. China imports over 400 billion dollars a year in foreign chips, and none of the leading edge ships are made inside China, none of the most advanced chips are made here in the U.S. either, but they're made using U.S. technology. And so U.S. companies have controlled over key choke points in the semiconductor supply chain, and the U.S. has used this to cut off China's access to chips. It did this to Huawei, kneecapping Huawei's 5G business. And it did it most recently in October with the Biden administrations export controls on chips that effectively shut China out of the most advanced graphics processing units, or GPUs, that are used for some of the most advanced AI applications. Exactly. So the U.S., Japan and the Netherlands collectively control 90 percent of the global market for semiconductor manufacturing equipment. So if the three of them say that the most advanced equipment doesn't go to China, then China is going to have a real challenge to find a way to indigenize this technology, because it's extremely advanced technology, and recently-It’s very possible that we end up in a place where countries are building and deploying quite dangerous AI weapons, and I think that’s something we need to think about and guard against.” Paul Scharre Four Battlegrounds argues that four key elements define this struggle: data, computing power, talent, and institutions. Data is a vital resource like coal or oil, but it must be collected and refined. Advanced computer chips are the essence of computing power—control over chip supply chains grants leverage over rivals. Talent is about people: which country attracts the best researchers and most advanced technology companies? The fourth “battlefield” is maybe the most critical: the ultimate global leader in AI will have institutions that effectively incorporate AI into their economy, society, and especially their military.

Pilots should be worried because AI is coming for their jobs. The reality is that, like in many areas, AI is going to offload tasks that people can do, and there’s a lot of advantages for that in the private sector or in the military. I do not want to live in a world where the Chinese Communist Party has that level of influence over global affairs. I find that concerning given their egregious human rights abuses at home, their bullying of their neighbors and abroad, their threatening of Taiwan and other countries in the region with military aggression, their militarization of the South China Sea. And I think it's part of the risk is not just about economic and military power and political power, but the spread of China's model of governance, their techno-authoritarianism, through adoption of their AI systems. China has things we simply don’t allow here, like facial recognition software everywhere. Do lax policies like that give Beijing a leg up? Scharre previously served as a strategic planner at the Office of the Secretary of Defense, working to establish policies on unmanned and autonomous systems and emerging weapons technologies, and established DOD policies on intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance programs.The book delves into four critical pillars: data, computing power, talent, and institutions, highlighting their pivotal roles in the AI landscape. As someone who has been studying this field since 2005, I found the data to be sound and the explanations of the TPU, GPU, and CPU distinctions particularly well done. Another example is the F-35 stealth fighter, which took 25 years to achieve partial deployment. It's hard to see AI development slowing enough for that kind of approach to succeed. So institutions are the organizations that are going to affect how countries adopt AI and employ them. And we can see throughout history that what matters more than getting technology first or even having the best technology is finding the best ways of using it. So if you look at aircraft technology, the fact that airplanes were invented in the United States gave the U.S. no meaningful advantage by the time you get to World War II. What mattered much more was figuring out, what do you do with an airplane? How do you use airplanes effectively? And all of the great powers at the time, they had access to airplane technology, there were lots of different experimentations about how to employ airplanes effectively. If you look at carrier aviation, the U.S. and Japan were able to innovate effectively and employ aircraft on aircraft carriers to change naval warfare. Great Britain had access to the same technology, and they stumbled not because of their technology, but because of bureaucratic and cultural squabbles within the British military, and they fell behind in carrier aviation. Another really important example in the book is how companies kowtow to China - for example, China requested a whole bunch of companies, specifically airlines, that they list Taiwan as a province of China. One of the companies that fell for this is Air Canada.