Prof. James C. Warf, a Manhattan Project chemist, author and activist, died last week.
An early member of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Warf held patents on the separation of plutonium from high-level nuclear waste. He taught chemistry at the University of Southern California for forty years, specializing in rare earth metals. He also taught for ten years in Indonesia and Brunei and, his son recalled, he wrote the first textbooks on organic and inorganic chemistry in the Indonesian language. He was a skilled amateur vintner and happily gave away samples of his product.
Dr. Warf also gave generously of his time and expertise to public interest groups concerned with nuclear weapons and nuclear reactor safety. He was a fundamentally decent man.
He was remembered in “James C. Warf dies at 91; Manhattan Project chemist became peace activist, USC professor” by Claire Noland, Los Angeles Times, November 9.
If Congress needs help understanding the risks and rewards of a piece of technology, they shouldn’t have to rely solely on the sparknotes from a salesman. The rub is much simpler: Congress needs nerds.
If we set up the new OTA to do its job well, members will see it as the first stop to see what issues are lurking around the corner. They will bring their questions early. And they will keep coming back for more.
Even the best-designed policy rests on assumptions about who will staff it, how it will be funded, whether the responsible institutions have ever coordinated, and if the goals are achievable.
These fellows will be working to turn ambitious ideas into actionable policy – from improving how frontier AI models are evaluated for government use to strengthening biosecurity protections and building the workforce needed to keep AI systems safe.