U.S. Army intelligence has published a new field manual (pdf) on how to structure an opposing force (OPFOR) for U.S. military training purposes.
“As a training tool, the OPFOR must be a challenging, uncooperative sparring partner capable of stressing any or all warfighting functions and mission-essential tasks of the U.S. force,” the manual states. See “Opposing Force Organization Guide,” FM 7-100.4, May 2007.
“Put Steven Aftergood in the Brig” is the eye-catching title of what is actually a rather sympathetic blog entry from Commentary Magazine’s Gabriel Schoenfeld on the recent dust-up between the Army and the Federation of American Scientists over our practice of publishing certain Army documents.
Army Threatens Critic Over Blog Policy was Justin Rood’s take at ABC News’ The Blotter.
Americans are paying too much for almost everything, because the United States has long treated its trucking industry as an artifact to be preserved rather than as an opportunity for innovation.
These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.
The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale
While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.