Headshot of Chris Panella.

US Army leaders say soldiers are drowning in so much battlefield data that AI is needed to make sense of it all

Army leaders say the modern battlefield is so saturated with sensors and networked weapons generating more data than soldiers can realistically process on their own that artificial intelligence is needed to meaningfully sort it all.

For years, the Army’s focus was on fielding more sensors for battlefield information and awareness, but now the service is also having to think about information overload and managing the massive amounts of data coming in.

During a recent US Army and NATO exercise in Europe, troops used a homegrown AI system to consume and sort data. The value wasn’t strictly that the AI could do it faster but rather that it could remember context and patterns that humans couldn’t.

The case from the Dynamic Front exercise is another example of how the US military is increasingly implementing AI and automation into everything from enemy attack simulations to paperwork.

“The modern battlefield, what we’re already seeing across the globe, it is swimming in sensors, and we are drowning in data,” Col. Jeff Pickler, the Army 2nd Multi-Domain Task Force commander, said at a media roundtable on Dynamic Front.

There aren’t enough people to decipher all the available information, he said. “They will never be able to fully process all of that.”


Two soldiers stand near an artillery piece about to fire in a wintry landscape.

This year’s Dynamic Front included almost 2,000 US personnel and almost 4,000 personnel from allies and partners.

US Army photo by Kevin Sterling Payne



The software aimed at addressing that problem remains in beta testing. In the next iteration of Dynamic Front — which will merge with another exercise, Arcane Front, to pair technology experimentation with theater-level combat rehearsals — Army leaders say they intend to test the AI at a larger scale.

“If we’re looking at a target set in the European theater where we think we’re going to need to process upwards of 1,500 targets a day, that’s beyond the human scope,” Pickler said. “The answer to the equation there is in AI and automations.”

During a potential large-scale conflict in Europe, AI could assist in locating and assessing those targets.

The system can do this quickly, but the speed isn’t the main benefit. AI can remember patterns that humans might forget or not even notice. Pickler gave an example of AI realizing that unrelated shipping reports, a local power outage, and a fertilizer delivery together might suggest missile fueling activity.

“So the difference isn’t seconds versus minutes — it’s minutes instead of months. Not because the machine scans quickly, but because it keeps context across sources that humans can’t hold in memory,” Pickler said after the roundtable.

“It doesn’t replace analysts by reading faster,” he said, “it replaces the weeks analysts spend reconnecting information spread across thousands of reports.”


Two soldiers sit at a table working on laptops.

AI, autonomy, and machine learning are at the forefront of the Army’s modernization efforts.

US Army photo by Capt. Regina Koesters



In a conflict scenario, that could mean analysts reach a clearer picture of the battlefield faster. Correlations between data gathered from different sensors could surface more quickly. If an adversary were fueling, arming, or moving weapons in ways that were not immediately obvious, AI could help flag those links.

Humans, though, would still decide how to respond.

Soldiers have seen success with iterating on the current AI model, the Army said. It’s been retooled during testing, and humans remain in the loop, reviewing outputs at multiple stages.

The goal is to continue increasing the overlap the model would have with human-produced information. In a targeting example, a milestone would be if AI achieved 90 to 95% agreement with humans on 100 target sets.

The Army’s push for AI and automation is also driving the development of its Next Generation Command and Control software, a priority initiative.

The technology being developed by vendor teams including Anduril, Palantir, and Lockheed Martin uses AI and machine learning to provide commanders and soldiers with real-time data on ammunition levels, maintenance needs, intelligence feeds, targeting, and simulated enemy attacks.

But AI is also changing other aspects of how the Army works. Autonomous features in drones, weapons, and targeting might be at the forefront, but behind the scenes, personnel are using new tools, redesigned workflows, and data integration for recruiting, maintenance, and inventors. These are manual tasks that the service believes can be improved with AI.




Source link

Im-a-millionaire-living-in-California-Im-happy-to-pay.jpeg

I’m a millionaire living in California. I’m happy to pay higher taxes since I have more wealth — it just makes sense.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Scott Ellis, a 55-year-old millionaire who lives in Silicon Valley, about California’s proposed 5% billionaire wealth tax. Ellis is a member of Patriotic Millionaires, a collection of wealthy Americans who advocate for a fair tax system, a livable wage, and equal access to political power. The following has been edited for length and clarity.

I never thought I’d live in California. I grew up in Colorado, went to college in Boston, and lived in Texas. I came out here for business school because I wanted to be at Stanford, and because you could play golf during the winter.

Now I love it here. It has nothing to do with taxes; taxes have never been anywhere on our list of criteria for deciding where to live. I want to live where my family is and love the weather, the jobs, and the dynamism.

Taxes are the price that we pay to live in a civil society. We have to do this together. There are examples all around the world of the power of effective government, and just like anything else, government needs to be funded. We should make it effective and efficient.

I’m proud to pay the taxes I pay. I should pay taxes that are higher than other people because I have more wealth than other people — that makes sense.

My wife and I achieved financial success in our careers

A lot of our financial success has been due to my wife’s success, as well as mine at the beginning of our careers.

I went to Harvard undergrad, worked at McKinsey for three years, and then went to Stanford. I then worked at Hewlett-Packard for almost eight years.

In 2007, my wife was a VP at Yahoo and we had two small kids. I looked at my boss’s job, and at the CEO’s job, and decided I didn’t ever want those roles. I thought, “Uh-oh, I’m on this ladder, and it’s not really where I want to go.”

Ultimately, my wife and I decided that I would step back and be the stay-at-home parent. My wife continued her career, and she’s been very successful in consumer internet at Yahoo, Google, and Pinterest.

I developed an interest in social issues in college

I studied poverty, urban America, housing, transportation, and sociology in college, and started thinking more about questions like: What does fairness look like? What does justice look like? What would it look like to build a great society?

I got busy pursuing my career, meeting my wife, and raising our kids, but as time passed and we progressed in our careers, I got back into thinking about how we help others around us. I did a bunch of volunteer work in different contexts, eventually becoming the COO and then the CSO of a nonprofit called New Teacher Center, which does intensive mentoring programs for new teachers.

Since 2012, I’ve started and run several nonprofits in the education space, and advised almost 200 individuals and organizations on things like strategy, finance, operations, and culture.

I’m also really focused on addressing excessive wealth and its impact on society and thinking about a future vision for American democracy, which is how I came to Patriotic Millionaires, an organization of wealthy Americans who advocate for higher taxes on wealthy people like ourselves, a higher minimum wage, and a broader distribution of political power across our society.

I’ve been struck by the massive accumulation of wealth

In recent years, I’ve been struck by the massive accumulation of wealth enabled by the consumer internet space, globalization, and the structure of the finance industry. It’s different from what it used to be in the ’80s and ’90s; this is a whole new ballgame.

More recently, I’ve been looking around Silicon Valley at all these people who are so incredibly wealthy, talented, and successful, and realizing how few of them are thinking about choosing to build a better society together.

They’re excited about starting new companies and raising new funds, but these are all people who have more money than they could ever spend, and their next goal is to generate even more money, mainly for people who already have more money than they could ever spend.

Meanwhile, 10% of our society is in poverty. It really feels unfair and wrong, and we can do better.

People don’t need more than $30 million

The proposed billionaire wealth tax in California doesn’t impact me and my family directly. People may think, “You’re happy to raise taxes on other people.”

But we need to start with a different conversation, about how much wealth is enough, how much wealth is too much, and what is financial success?

I believe that if you have $30 million in wealth, congratulations, you won capitalism. If you do the analysis of reasonable investment returns and inflation, you can buy a really nice first house, a nice second house, your kids’ college is paid for, your end-of-life expenses are covered, and you have a very, very luxurious ongoing existence.

So much of success in life is luck. Yes, people absolutely get educated and work hard. But it’s been found that the wealthier people are, the more they tend to attribute their wealth to how good they are and how hard they worked.

I look at single moms working three jobs, working the night shift — a heck of a lot of people who have less than $190,000 [the median household wealth] in wealth are working very hard.

Once you get beyond $30 million — and almost no one ever gets there — you get to a point where your life is so good, you really can’t materially improve your life anymore. We should implement a very aggressive annual 50% tax on all household wealth over $30 million. Excessive wealth turns into excessive power through huge campaign donations, which threatens and undermines democracy and capitalism.

The wealth tax is a step in the right direction — but not enough

I’m absolutely delighted that we’re moving in this direction, but I believe changes to wealth taxes need to happen at the federal level.

When wealthy folks bring up moving out of California, it’s a distraction. All of a sudden, instead of us talking about the fact that millions of people are going to be either losing healthcare or paying much more for healthcare, we’re worried about the 200 really rich people who might move.

People move all the time. Companies move all the time for all kinds of reasons — it’s just part of business. These conversations happen all the time — like, “Oh my gosh, there won’t be any more companies in Silicon Valley.” Well, 20 years later, look around. There are still some companies here; it’s just fine.

It’s 65 degrees and sunny here. The CEO of Nvidia recently said they’ll be staying in California because that’s where the talent is. We’ve got the Golden Gate Bridge, Hollywood, Tahoe, the Redwoods, the beach, and great weather. I’m really not worried that people aren’t going to want to live in California.

I love it here. My wife and I are thinking about living in different cities for maybe a month at a time, but I have no plans to go anywhere else. Although I definitely love Colorado — I still have my Denver Broncos coasters and will be cheering for my Broncos — I’m from Silicon Valley now, and that’s where I’m going to stay.




Source link

A-Google-VP-explains-why-ads-make-sense-in-AI.jpeg

A Google VP explains why ads make sense in AI search but not Gemini — yet

Marketers champing at the bit for AI chatbots to become the next major ad surface may have to suppress their appetites a little longer.

With Google’s Gemini surging in popularity, speculation has been bubbling in the ad industry that the app might be on the cusp of introducing ads to capitalize on the moment — and help offset the hefty AI infrastructure costs.

Not so, according to Google’s VP of global ads, Dan Taylor. In an interview with Business Insider this week, Taylor reaffirmed there are “no plans for ads in the Gemini app.”

Instead, the ads team is prioritizing ad placements within AI search. Google began introducing ads to AI Overviews — the natural language summaries of search results that appear at the top of its search engine results page — in 2024. Last year, it brought ads to AI Mode, its AI chatbot that appears on search pages, which enables users to conduct more in-depth research and ask follow-up questions.

“Search and Gemini are complementary tools with different roles,” Taylor said.

“While they both use AI, search is where you go for information on the web, and Gemini is your AI assistant,” he said. “Search is helping you discover new information, which can include commercial interests like new products or services. We see Gemini as helping you create, analyze, and complete that.”

From an advertising perspective, Google has over 25 years of experience with search ads. Monetizing AI assistants is a relatively new, uncharted territory with numerous questions to consider.

Here are a few:

  • Where and when should an ad show up?
  • What would these ads look like, and how should companies think about charging for them?
  • How can an AI chatbot balance commercial interests while also ensuring users feel they are getting accurate and objective answers?
  • Could the introduction of ads alienate users in a competitive landscape where apps like Gemini are fighting for supremacy against the likes of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Microsoft’s Copilot, and Anthropic’s Claude?

A first-mover disadvantage?

Ads might feel inevitable as tech giants invest billions of dollars into their AI infrastructures. However, AI companies are aware that making the first move could be perceived as a degradation of their products and cause users to jump ship.

Google’s success in leveraging AI to create financial gains from its existing search product and advertising platform is one advantage it has over arch-rival OpenAI, which is under pressure to demonstrate a path to profitability. It potentially gives Google more leeway to wait before introducing an ad model to Gemini.

Stratechery tech analyst Ben Thompson said in a recent interview on the tech news show TBPN that OpenAI delaying ads in ChatGPT “risks the entire company.”

“They could have launched the world’s crappiest ads in 2023. By today, in 2026, they would be good,” Thompson said. “Now, they’re going to have to launch ads, they’re going to suck, and people are going to be like, ‘This sucks, I’ll just go to Gemini.'”

The rivalry between Google and OpenAI intensified late last year when Google released its Gemini 3 AI model, which received rave reviews. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman responded by issuing a “code red,” telling teams to redirect resources from newer projects, including a yet-to-be-released advertising program, to prioritize improving ChatGPT’s performance.

Gemini had 650 million monthly active users, Alphabet, Google’s parent company, said in its latest quarterly earnings report in October. OpenAI said in October that ChatGPT had 800 million weekly users.

What Google has learned from ads in AI search so far

Taylor said that more than 80% of Google’s advertisers are currently using some form of AI-powered search functionality. That’s largely through the adoption of tools like AI Max for Search and Performance Max, where Google’s AI algorithm automatically chooses which ad creatives a campaign should run and where to place those ads.

Advertisers can’t yet specifically choose to run ads within AI Mode or AI Overviews. Instead, the algorithm makes the decision to place them there based on targeting variables like location, demographics, keywords, and topics.

“We don’t have any plans to enable buying separately at this phase,” Taylor said.

Taylor said AI Overviews have notched up more than 2 billion monthly active users, and that people are clicking and engaging with AI Overview ads “at about the same rate” as traditional search ads.

Google’s testing of ads in AI Mode isn’t as far along and presents more challenges when trying to convert the traditional search ads playbook for the AI era. Users have longer back-and-forth conversations in AI Mode, and ads shown too early can feel “intrusive” and create “a trust problem,” Taylor said. A newbie runner seeking helpful information about how to prepare their body for a marathon later in the year might not be ready straight away for ads featuring performance running shoes, for example, he added.

This month, Google said it had begun testing a new ad format called Direct Offers, which will let advertisers present personalized discounts to shoppers who are about to make a purchase within AI Mode. Taylor said Google is only working with a specific set of advertisers on the Direct Offers pilot and didn’t have more information about when it might become broadly available.

Direct Offers was one of several announcements Google made regarding new AI-shopping experiences. New products included a forthcoming checkout function that will let shoppers complete their purchases inside AI Mode and the Gemini app.




Source link