Army Issues New Regulations on “Biological Surety”
U.S. Army personnel who act in an aggressive or threatening manner towards other people would be denied access to toxic or lethal biological agents under newly revised regulations (pdf) that were issued by the Army last week.
Other potentially disqualifying personality traits include: “arrogance, inflexibility, suspiciousness, hostility,… and extreme moods or mood swings,” according to the new regulations. See “Biological Surety,” Army Regulation 50-1, 28 July 2008.
The late Fort Detrick scientist Dr. Bruce E. Ivins retained his security clearance and his laboratory access through July 10, the Washington Post reported today, despite allegations of erratic behavior and the fact that he was under FBI suspicion in connection with the 2001 anthrax attacks. The credibility of some of those allegations regarding Ivins’ behavior, however, is itself open to question, writes Glenn Greenwald in Salon today.
It is in the interests of the United States to appropriately protect information that needs to be protected while maintaining our participation in new discoveries to maintain our competitive advantage.
The question is not whether the capital exists (it does!), nor whether energy solutions are available (they are!), but whether we can align energy finance quickly enough to channel the right types of capital where and when it’s needed most.
Our analysis of federal AI governance across administrations shows that divergent compliance procedures and uneven institutional capacity challenge the government’s ability to deploy AI in ways that uphold public trust.
From California to New Jersey, wildfires are taking a toll—costing the United States up to $424 billion annually and displacing tens of thousands of people. Congress needs solutions.