NATO is looking to connect with startups

How much of that is due to China's protectionism, huge untapped market and forced local partnerships vs what the company's tech is actually worth?

/s

Facial recognition seems more useful for controlling a civilian population at home.

What percent of Chinese publishing is not fraudulent?

Look at the scale of Fraud across China, including in Academia:

"The online publication Quartz reported in 2017 that more than 50 percent of all articles retracted by scientific journals worldwide for fake peer reviews were submitted by Chinese authors. ... 55% - The percentage of articles submitted by Chinese authors that were retracted by scientific journals worldwide for fake peer reviews"

"It usually involves authors posing as their own peer reviewers and submitting made-up contact information for the supposed reviewer – a scam that publishers exposed by tracking the email addresses of author and reviewer to the same IP address. This type of fraud is on the rise and more often than not involves Chinese authors.

"In 2015, for instance, Britain-based publisher BioMed Central retracted 43 articles, including 41 from China.

"Later in the same year, Germany’s Springer retracted 64 papers, nearly all from Chinese scholars,

"while the Dutch publishing company Elsevier retracted nine medical science articles written by Chinese researchers.

"In what is said to be the largest single-incident retraction of journal publications in history, Springer Nature in 2017 retracted 107 articles in Tumor Biology published between 2012 and 2016, all of them authored by Chinese scholars from universities in Shanghai." [1]

[1] https://wenr.wes.org/2018/04/the-economy-of-fraud-in-academi...

I agree with eliminating shark fin soup, it is a cruel and destructive harvesting practice. But it absolutely should not have been a part of a bill on funding tech innovation. Argh.

This is not enough money and this timeline is ridiculously long.

The thing that I'm trying to express, the thing that policy makers can't quite get their heads around, is that war AI is different. It's not a little startup-y thing you can cobble together until it sorta, kinda works for a specific use-case. We already have that. Missiles, aircraft, nuclear weapons simulations all have specialized AI. But that isn't the future. The future is something like Alpha Zero being applied to a whole domain or a whole battlefield. Something that coordinates and controls all the ships, planes, missiles, drones, and sensors in an arena for as total domination as can be achieved. We've had AI that augments human ability for decades. And it is effective, no question.

But that isn't what is going to define the next generation of warfare.

* Hong Kong is part of China since it was decolonized. This is indisputable.

I'm curious, have you actually studied the historical context of Crimea and Hong Kong? Beyond just taking headlines from NATO-aligned tabloids as absolute fact?

Speaking of the British empire, only an upper middle class westerner can nod their head when they see the British, who oversaw a massacre of Chinese in Hong Kong in 1967, pontificating over China's obligations to the British empire vis a vis Hong Kong. They even have former commander in chief of British Forces Overseas Hong Kong Chris Patten on Sky News lecturing the Chinese. The reason the UK took hold of Hong Kong was they went to war with the Chinese in order to push heroin and opium on a Chinese population they were trying to turn into drug addicts.