Very interesting topic explored here. For your last question- is this really a bad thing? Don’t we want the best cows and want to breed the strongest traits moving forward? I’m also curious about how assessing cow grazing will provide better data on the optimal farming land, feed etc needed for them to perhaps better optimize their raising to provide food to under served areas?
These are great points. My intuition is that they are an augmentation because you can never fully replace the human element. The DOD landscape is certainly keen on innovation and I think it is moving to be less restrictive as time goes on. I hope more company’s offer their unique capabilities to the DOD!
Excellent and thought provoking article. To the comment above and to the article, I would argue that geo-tagging is not and should never be used in a vacuum. It is rather another intelligence breadcrumb used in a puzzle for targeting needs. Units should always be sensitive to collateral damage, no matter how sure the information.
I would take the final assertion a step further and say, with the proven depression that comes from excessive social media use, and the obvious issues with troops revealing mission critical information in online posts, is there any downside to forbidding the use of personal smart phones all together in deployed zones?
For your second question, I would argue the Army and DOD area already making great strides in their acquisition agility through the expanded use of the Other Transactional Authority (i.e. CSO, Consortium etc.) There are also other Army offices that do rapid acquisition and fielding such as the Rapid Capabilities Office and Rapid Equipping Force which expedite traditional Federal Acquisition Regulation contracts. There is certainly a long way to go, but I believe making bidding more transparent and accessible and having a focus on measurable fielding times will greatly benefit military acquisition.
Great piece but I’m not sure if DOD acquisition is always a positive goal. First off, very few companies are “acquired” by the DOD, but rather it is their technologies that are purchased or sold to the DOD. Second, even if the DOD could create this capability internally, do you think it is best to do so? Having a dual purpose company for the civilian and military sectors maintains the agility of private markets while still addressing mission critical DOD needs.
Great points about the tradeoff between accuracy and security. I would argue the contention lies not in working with other fintech companies but perhaps leveraging best practices in endpoint security from enterprise IT software firms?
Very thought provoking! I agree that language can only truly be perfected through in person interaction and that digital models, while valuable in the interim will never fully replace immersion. Perhaps Duolingo can circumvent some of the problems you cited by having an opt-in immersion option, where data can be both sold to companies providing this service but in a targeted way that benefits the consumer?