Transcripts For CSPAN2 Joint House Hearing On Artificial Intelligence Technology 20210312

i call this joint subcommittee hearing together and the subcommittee on cyber nation technologies and information systems along with the subcommittee on oversight and government reform. good morning everyone, before i begin my opening statement i will give a brief technical readout for those numbers that are participating remotely. i want to welcome members who are joining us today's joint hearing remotely. numbers who are joining remotely must be visible on screen for the purposes of identifying identity verification establishing and maintaining a quorum participating in a proceeding and voting. those members must continue to use the video function while in attendance unless they are experiencing connectivity issues or other technical problems that render them unable to participate on camera. if technical divinities they should contact the committee staff for assistance. video a members participation will be broadcasted in a room and via the television internet feeds and members participating remotely must seek recognition verbally and they are asked to mute the microphones when they are not speaking. members who are participating remotely are reminded to keep the software platform video function on the entire time you are attending the proceeding and members may leave and join the proceeding. if they depart for short while other than different proceedings they should leave the video function on. members will be absent for significant time or depart to join a different proceeding they should exit the platform entirely and then rejoin if they return. members may use the software platforms chat feature to communicate regarding technical or logistical support issues only. finally, i've designated the committee staff member to, if necessary, mute unrecognized members microphones to cancel any inadvertent background noise that may disrupt the proceedings. so, with that technical message out of the way i am now going to proceed with my opening statement and then turn it over. i want to welcome everyone to our joint hearing with the house committee on oversight and subcommittee on national security. we will review the final recommendations of the national security commission on artificial intelligence. we welcome the subcommittee chairman as steven lynch, my good friend from massachusetts and ranking member [inaudible] and we are also pleased to host our hearts house armed services committee chairman smith and mike rogers. looks like we have a full house today. looking forward to this very meaningful and exciting hearing. i am pleased to welcome of course most especially for commissioners from the national security commission and artificial intelligence commission those created by the house and armed services committee and the national defense authorization act with fiscal year 2019 to help us advance the development of artificial intelligence, machine learning and associated technologies to repair the defense enterprise, national security challenges of the future. we ask this commission to produce a bipartisan whole of government efforts focused on solving national security issues and we appreciate the leadership and the hard work of our witnesses and we owe each of them an immense debt of gratitude. today we welcome doctor eric schmidt chairman of the commission also, honorable vice chairman and the honorable clyburn commissioner and doctor louis commissioner of the lines of effort focused on protecting and building on ai advantages marshaling global cooperation and threat analysis and response action. while many of the commissioners heal here hail from the tech sector it truly begins in government defense labs and specifically with investments by the department defense against research projects that received [inaudible] in the office of naval research. decades later we must redouble our focus in the power of defense science and technology research to propel us into the future. i look forward to hearing the commissioners recommendation on investments in basic and applied research and how to encourage faster adoption of innovative and cutting edge capabilities. the next generation challenges are upon us and in our subcommittee hearing we talked about how the department can transform innovation into reality, specifically by orienting ourselves on the software and data capabilities that are often the heart of the platforms we acquire and that promise to dramatically improve decision-making and optimization process. the battle space of the future will be a complex web of software, networks and data integration and data integrated across domains and among our allies. artificial intelligence and other next-generation innovation will be crucial in order to harness the power of data to give our men and women in uniform and edge in any future conflict. our potential adversaries across are already investing heavily in the future as well. so, this commission has undertaken the difficult task to articulate the potential of artificial intelligence and the risks and benefits that lie ahead. we work through these issues and identify recommendations related to research in software development. there are opportunities for international partnerships, safeguarding against our adversaries advancements in the space and cultivating a 21st century workforce. above all, we have crucial recommendations related to building and deploying ai in an ethical manner that is respectful of human rights. indeed, that last category is what sets our nation apart. i commend the defense innovation board which was chaired until last year by doctor smith to help that apartment begin important discussions on ethics in ai. last year ranking members along with chairman smith championed a package of provisions based on the commission's first corner recommendations that yielded 13 revisions in the national defense authorization act for fiscal year 2021. the majority was driven by strengthening that talent. we need to solve our most pressing national security challenges, indeed, great power competition is also a race for talent. we must move past all models of training and learning in establishing a system to dynamically upscale our workforce as the technology evolves. ranking member and i were pleased to invite commissioner representatives for a review of the interim recommendations last fall and we look forward to hearing about your recently raised final recommendations to congress. incredibly, there are over 100 total and over 50 related to their purview of the armed services committee. we commend you for all your work and you put into this effort these past two years and we are grateful for that work and due diligence and look forward to receiving your testimonies today. with that i will now turn to ranking member for her remarks. >> thank you, chairman. the national security commission on artificial intelligence is a critical step forward that i have proud to champion in the house of my colleagues in a bipartisan basis. today's hearing is a culmination of years of hard work of our commission. chairman schmidt, vice chairman work in queue for serving on the commission and for testifying today. your efforts will serve as a blueprint for how our country will respond to, develop and lead the world in artificial intelligence capabilities. as we know ai not only brings immense technological opportunities and innovation but ai will play a cynic and risk as our adversaries will deploy ai to challenge american interests and securities on our shores and abroad. importantly, as you laid out in your final recommendations ai will affect every facet of life going forward from civil society to our economy and of course, national security. the department of defense specifically this final report is stark in its assessments. china will surpass the united states in ai leadership and when the innovation race if we fail to invest in emerging technologies and if we fail to take a whole of government approach to ai. the impact on our national security is profound and disturbing in the report concluded that china will achieve superiority over the u.s. and the next decade if we don't follow our organizational and investment challenges by 2025 just four years from now. we face hard choices given our limited resources to maintain that technological advantage over china. future complex will take place on an ai battlefield we must consider the future of assistance that are not ai enabled. simply put, deity must be willing to take on risk and congress should enforce those efforts. further, u.s. cannot win the competition if we don't have the workforce. the commission highlighted our talent deficit and concluded this problem is the greatest impediment to being ai ready by 2025. the chairman and i are committed to solving this talent deficit last year we introduced legislation to retain technical talent here in the u.s. i also look forward to hearing more about the digital service academy recommendations and other ways we can develop the necessary workforce within the dod. alternatively, our private sector is driving many of the advances in ai and we should encourage increased collaboration between the departments and private sector partners. the subcommittee understands the issues that companies have interacting with dod. primarily, the acquisition process. the support underscores the importance of producing redtape that the department [inaudible] again, i'm very proud of the work accomplished by this commission and the work that we did to include many of the recommendations in last years in daa but more work must be done. our war fighters must have the advanced technological capabilities to deter and defeat our adversaries in an ai environment. to improve the lethality and capabilities are forces, we must continue to is more the joint artificial intelligence center and enable the services and combat in command to develop, tailor and deploy ai systems to the battle stage bird and look for to the presentation today and the discussion and i yield back. >> thank you, ranking member. i now recognize chairman lynch for his or marks. >> good morning is determined. before and began our do want to thank you, mr. chairman, for your continued leadership in the areas of cyberspace operations, artificial intelligence and other developing technologies all with critical implications for national security. i'm pleased to join chairman smith, ranking member, as our subcommittee conducts today's important work to examine the final report released earlier this month by the national security commission on artificial intelligence. ai carries the remarkable potential to enhance and even transform our national security. we are already beginning to integrate ai algorithms, applications and systems to facilitate intelligence collection and analysis including to detect and protect future terrorist attacks. we are also deploying ai to support battlefield medical evacuations, logistical missions and military operations in iraq, syria and afghanistan of conflict zones. on the financial services committee where i serve at on the task force for financial technology we are seeing the use of ai and machine learning technology to enhance international investigations to combat terrorism financing and money laundering. however, the evolution of artificial intelligence has also heightened process that america's adversaries will win the race to develop and deploy ai. and to do so for maligned purposes. to the great detriment of our national security as reported by the national security commission on artificial intelligence and this is a quote, ai is expanding the window of vulnerability to the united states is already entered and for the time since world war ii america's technological predominance is the backbone of the economic military power is under threat. clearly, cyber security has become synonymous with national security and our fundamental duty protect our democracy requires that we quote, be ai ready. with resources, personnel and strategies necessary to meet these urgent challenges and according to the commission however, we are a long way from that goal and absent shifting trends quote, china possesses the might, the talent and ambition to surpass the united states as the world's leader in ai in the next decade. if 2020 booked the kill chain in the future of high-tech warfare, the former staff director of the senate armed services committee under chairman john mccain articulates that quote, a core pillar of the chinese commonest parties plan and harnessing emerging technology is to leapfrog the united states and become the world's preeminent power. in fact, the 2017 development plan on artificial intelligence issued by china's state council envision that china will lead the international ai sector as soon as 2030. it is also worth noting that in the race to develop and deploy ai our adversaries such as the russian federation and the people's republic of china do not struggle with the moral restrictions faced by democratic governments on the use of ai enabled autonomous weapons, nor are they hindered by moral considerations regarding the impact of ai on civil liberties. however, thanks to the expertise and dedication of the ns aci commissioners and their staff this final report that they have released earlier this month sets for the conference a blueprint to help the new administration and congress allocate appropriate federal resources toward the advancement of ai technologies, technical infrastructure and digitally proficient workforce. we must also work together to ensure that these efforts maximize the opportunity for robust oversight and transparency and accountability that reflect our compelling national interest in safeguarding the civil liberties of all americans. to that end i'm proud to be an original cosponsor of representative of coming to establish a digital service academy, the creation of a fully accredited university to train future public servants and artificial intelligence and other digital fields as a possible recommendation, including the commission's final report. want to thank mr. chairman and i look for today's hearing and discussing these issues with artist in which panelists and i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you, chairman lynch. again, i'm grateful that you and i could team up to bring our two subcommittees together on this very important topic. i thank you for your leadership. with that we will now turn to the ranking member for his or marks. >> very pleasant today and great to start off today by this hearing a nice boston accent. i first want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for inviting us to enjoin in this meeting. i thanked chairman lynch for having us. advancing american technology safely and effectively should be a bipartisan priority. also to thank our witnesses are today and i particularly thank you for not having us see you on a zoom. to see you live and in person is a real treat for us congressmen. you authored an impressive report on the future of artificial intelligence or ai and gave us a roadmap on how to proceed. it poses significant potentially positive outcomes but also significant challenges particularly surrounding ethical use and data security. i think it is the duty of congress to examine both the positive and negatives of ai prior to authorizing what is likely to be billions of dollars for decades. your report highlights much of this but i want to focus on two main topics, improving the government and ensuring privacy. the purpose of civilian government use of ai should be to decrease a footprint in size while increasing the effectiveness of the federal government would defeat the purpose of automation technology to simply expand the size and scope of agencies instead of streamlining the workforce. an analysis by deloitte suggests the smart use of ai can save billions of man hours and billions of dollars. the level of savings can only be experienced as a government make cuts were ai allows us we can see the benefits already taking place all over the government leg of the social security administration and the patent and trademark office and as technology grows and advances so most our workforce. the government would let me see here, government must get better at recruiting and retaining top talent to achieve the benefits of ai must be able to ensure our fellow americans the data is safe and technology is being used ethically. ai can be prone to false positives and negatives and overreliance on suspected patterns. it also relies on mass amounts of data in order to continue to learn and evolve and we must protect this data through data stewardship requirements, status transparency and disclose the rules data governance rules and data collection rules and these protections must be put in place and we can see the dangers of runaway ai use in china. using ai to support genocide and suppressed democracy in hong kong provides insight into how our adversaries view and use this technology. i will say rather than suppressed democracy but suppressed freedom. as a way to suppress dissent and become a military power it is vital that the u.s. counter these actions and look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about how we can balance the new global arms race of the government efficiency and privacy and thank you, i yield back. >> thank you ranking member. we will now hear from our witnesses and move into the question and answer session. i just want to make sure that chairman smith ranking member rogers not to have an opening comment. >> i'm good, thanks. >> very good. i don't know if the ranking member is on or if he has any comments. hearing none we will now turn to our witnesses and then moved to the question and answer time. i would like to know recognize actor eric schmidt chairman of the commission paid he is the cofounder of schmidt futures and was the technical advisor to the board of alphabet and before that google. he has a distinguished record of contributions to the national security technology community, including chairing the defense innovation board. doctor schmidt, as a commissioner on the cyberspace commission i want to say a big thank you for your commitment to ensuring that the two commissions work together and, let me say, how pleased i am to see you champion some of the recommendations as well. we are deeply in your debt and i'm grateful for contributions to these areas and i now recognize you to summarize your testimony for five minutes. >> well, thank you, chairman. ranking member, chairman and the members of all the committees i am very pleased on behalf of all our commissioners to present 751 pages which you asked us to produce more than two years ago and i cannot be prouder of this report. it is both the quality and the heft are worth noting. more than two years ago this committee foresaw the huge impact of ai on our society and our national security and also foresaw the future and potential perhaps likely threats from our opponents. that process along the way we work with you in the nda a one year ago to get some important changes in the legislation that will really help our nation just overall i cannot say enough about the way we work together in the support you have given us and the opportunity you've given us to serve the nation. what i thought i would do right now is give a quick summary of where the report is my fellow commissioners can take you into the very interesting detail. we reached a number of overarching judgments in the first is the government is not organized nor resourced to end the technology competition against a competitor and is not prepared to defend against ai and able thoughts and we strongly believe that our nation needs to be ai ready by 2025 to defend and compete in the coming era of ai accelerated competition and complex. we put the report into two parts in the first part is part one defending america in the ai era and it's fundamentally how the u.s. can use technologies to prevent protect the america people that focuses on the indications of applications for ai and security and the second part is winning the technology competition but it's obvious by the way we should when that recommends government actions to promote ai innovation, promote national competitiveness and protect critical advantages in the larger strategic in china. the idea of simplifying what we need to get done is a great many details as you will hear about. the first one is leadership. the government isn't quite ready for this and it's not organized in the right way and we need organizational structures accelerate the government integration of ai in the promotion of ai across country and there needs to be something at the white house we are proposing a technology competitive council reporting into the vice president and that would precisely monitor and drive this transformation that we need and by the way, it's not just the government but the private sector. callan, as you have identified, a number of you in your opening comments there is a huge talent deficit in the government we need to build new pipelines and expand existing programs and cultivate ai talent nationwide and ensure the best technology come to the u.s. and stay in the u.s. and don't go to our competitors. it seems obvious but incredibly important to emphasize pride and hard were ai are critically dependent upon hardware and we as a country are too dependent on manufacturing in east asia and taiwan in particular. most cutting edge plans are produced in a specific plant that's 110 miles from china and that has got to be an issue. we must revitalize u.s. cutting-edge and implementing national electronic strategy and we state very clearly in our report that the objectives is to stay two generations ahead of the chinese effort and cannot be clear in our view. the fourth of course is innovation. ai research is expensive and we need the government to help and set the conditions for broad-based we need national ai research infrastructure for more than the top five companies have the resources to innovate and in particular startups and universities need this facility. we also need to add we think over five or 67 years up to $40 billion in annual funding in the next five years to cover ai for defense and nondefense purposes. as you highlighted in your comments there are other things that are crossing in the first is partnerships and we need to build coalitions with like-minded nations and the technology democracy and the techno- democracies in my own verbiage to advance the development and use of ai and emerging technologies that support our values which is critical. we spent a lot of time on a report talking about values. the second is consistent with the value is responsible use and in the face of the digital authoritarianism we need, we the u.s., need to present a democratic model of responsible use of ai financial security and you can imagine the opponents and how they might use or misuse these things. the trust of our nation and the trust of our citizen will hinge on justified assurance that the governments use of ai will respect privacy, civil liberties and civil rights. we have a set of recommendations along those lines. i really thank you all for giving us this opportunity and it's been a true privilege for me to be part of this and help lead it. thank you very much. >> thank you, chairman smith. with that we will hear from the honorable vice chair of the commission and secretary of defense and undersecretary of the navy. i welcome him back before us today. doctor work, you are not recognized thank you for having us today and it's a great opportunity to justify before you today the deal with national defense the commission fears of our armed forces will lose their competitive military tactical advantage within the next decade if they do not accelerate the adoption of ai across all their military missions and the intelligence record we think is quite clear and i also would like to just note that we have a classified annex that i would commend to all the members. it is a summation of the intelligence record of what we think or know what our competitors are doing with ai. you're not going to be able to defend against ai and able threats without ubiquitous ai capabilities of our own in new war fighting concepts and paradigms. without question ai enabled force will be more effective and ai enabled systems can make targeting more discriminant and precise thereby reducing civilian casualties and damage the civilian infrastructure and other protected entities. it will improve the tempo, speed and scale of operations and will enhance the way the battlefield can be monitored and will help the way the commanders understand what is happening in the battle space. it will also augment the ability of service members and the way they perceive, understand, adapt and act in the course of all their missions. as erica said if we are going to win this competition we think we need to beat what we call, ai ready by 2025. which, by that, we mean we will have the foundation in place for the widespread integration of ai across the force. the formate ingredients to achieve this vision. versus top-down leadership and strategic direction. on a transformation of the scale that we believe is necessary you have to have strong top-down leadership. they set the priorities and they overcome the barriers to think. we think the new reporting structure established in the nda is a strong first step and congress should also direct the department interviewed to form a committee on emerging technologies and includes the representation from the intelligence community and this committee would drive action -- and emerging technologies. the committee would align priorities, strategy and resources across the joint staff in the intelligence community. effective integration of ai will require close partnerships between the technologists and the war fighters to ensure technical expertise and form capability and requirements at the highest level and we recommend that the u.s. under secretary of defense for research and engineering be made the cochair and the chief science advisor of the joint requirements oversight council or j rock. we also believe the department should set specific ai readiness performance by the end of fiscal year 2021 and this will drive the outcomes of ai ready by 2025. second, the department we think must ensure it has in place the resources and processes organizations to enable ai innovation. the department needs to establish a common digital ecosystem and it is called the joint common foundation in the department of defense and that is good for a start and that is the technical foundation for all ai development and it will include access to a secure cloud, ai software, training models, data and algorithms as well as high-performance computing power and the development and environment that allows the entire ai staff to be put together in a way that is secure and will do what we expected to do on the battlefield. we think jake should be designated as the deferments ai accelerator. in our view into focus on applications, not on hard research and essentially the jake's role is to determine or get as many of occasions into the field as possible and provide the resources through the digital ecosystem or joint common foundation and they also can provide subject matter expertise to support ai efforts across the department without becoming essential clearinghouse and the department has to expand the use of specialized acquisition pathways and contracting authorities to source deliver the best ai. ranking member mentioned this software and algorithms are just a different kettle of fish than ships, airplanes, missiles et cetera. we have to come up with ways that are specific to get those algorithms and models developed in into the hands of our war fighters. we have to come together also to reform the planning programming budget and execution process in congress has provided us or excuse me, provided the department of defense with an expanded toolkit of acquisition and contracting approaches in the department's efforts to adopt ai will be impeded by processes that are unsuited to digital technologies and the pace of development of ai right now. the department also increase its overall spending and increase ara and d2 a billion annually by 2025. we think that is totally appropriate within the size of the dod budget which is the largest in its history. third, we think ai adoption has to be accelerated and we think one of the ways to get these algorithms and models across the valley of death and into the hands of or fighters would create a dedicated ai fund specifically designed to speed operational prototyping and transition and overseen by the under secretary of defense for r and e. we think that apartment should prioritize adoption of commercial ai solutions, especially to its core business processes and administrative processes, as well as logistics and sustainment systems. technologies should be integrated at every level in the department and the administrative side as well as the operational site. this would mean for example standing up to ai development teams. fourth and finally, as eric said, we need the adoption of these technologies among our allies and partners and promote ai interoperability. thank you again for the opportunity to testify here today and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, secretary work. we greatly appreciate your contribution and efforts in this extraordinary report and effort. we will now receive testimony from the honorable clyburn, who spent nine years on the federal communications commission where she worked to close the digital divide and she has a distinguished career fighting for diversity in the communications sector and i welcome her back to share more of her thoughts on workforce and ethics to the commission. commissioner, clyburn, you're not wrecking eyes to summarize testimony for five minutes. >> thank you very much. chairman, ranking member, i am having a tongue-tied morning. members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to highlight the commissions workforce recommendations and i would like to thank the members of the committee particularly the chairman and ranking member for your leadership and for advancing many of the commission's recommendations in this area. each time my fellow commissioners discussed the workforce we arrived at the same conclusions. the military needs to have expertise both in and outs of uniform or it will be unable to perform the tasks described in our reports. the dod is unlikely to develop expertise quickly enough on its own and as a result it is the department of defense will become ai ready especially by 2025 as we have recommended congressional action will be needed. allow me to briefly describe four high-priority recommendations in the report. first, most critical for the ai workforce, the need for military and civilian career fields and suffer development, data science and artificial intelligence. the inability of our digital subject matter experts to spend their career working and digital fields is arguably the single most important issue impeding modernization. without this career path dod will continue to struggle to recruit new talent, identify talent and retain the talent it already has. i should note that many of the military and civilian experts we spoke with when the commission started have since left government service because they were unable to continue working on ai. we must stop leading talent. this is a well-known problem with a relatively straightforward solution but unfortunately we have not seen enough progress and it is time for us to take concrete steps to address the hemorrhaging when it comes to talent. our second priority is training junior leaders. we must fundamentally change how junior leaders use and interact with ai and other information processing agents. junior leaders must not only understand how to team with machines but learn when to trust machine outputs. we recommend the military services integrate ai topics into pre- commissioning and entry-level training for junior officers and training for both junior and senior noncommissioned officers. our third priority is to incentivize the emerging technology literacy among senior officers. we often speak of the need for a culture change in dod but the most effective way to change culture is to change incentives. using the goldwater nichols act has joined competency as a model congress has [inaudible] certification process and critical billets. service member should earn their certification by serving in noncritical emerging technology billets, fellowships with industry and academia, graduating certifying courses and earning commercial certifications. finally, we recommend the united states digital service academy, an accredited degree granting university and the academy would help meet the governments need for expertise and artificial intelligence, software engineering, electrical engineering, competition will biology several other areas. students would attend the school tuition free and receive a highly technical education. graduates would then enter the government as the servo five-year service obligation. our staff will be available to work with you on further details of each recommendation but for your convenience and consideration we have produced a draft or we have produced draft legislative language for your review. thank you again for the opportunity to prepare before you and i look for to any questions you may have. >> thank you very much, commissioner. we appreciate your testimony today and now lastly we will receive testimony from mr. gilman louie peer he is a cofounder and partner of the partners and early-stage technology enter capital firms and is the very first ceo of the venture capital firm established with the backing of the central intelligence agency. i welcome you now to share his insight from the commission on technical advantages, global cooperation and threat analysis. you are not recognized to summarize your testimony for five minutes. >> thank you very much. chairman, ranking member and members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to testify today. a report took a broad view of national security to encompass economic competitiveness as eric has noted as well as what has been discussed. i want to focus on a series of crosscutting initials agouti problems related to ai that needs urgent attention. what these have in common is our adversaries are aiming to take advantage of the free and open nature of our society. first, our societies digital dependency leaves us vulnerable to emerging ai enabled threats and for example, adversaries are using ai to enhance disinformation campaigns and cyber attacks. there are also harvesting data on americans to build profiles of their beliefs, behavior and biological makeup through the use of tailored attempts to manipulate oco worse individuals. this is a gathering storm of foreign influence and interference and requires organizational and policy reforms to bolster our resilience. you should stand up and 24 by seven operation centers to confront digital disinformation. the government needs to better secure its own databases and prioritize data security and foreign investment screens, supply chain risk management and national data protection legislation. we need ai enabled cyber defenses to protect against ai enabled cyber attacks. as the pandemic has made clear by a security must become a top-tier priority in national security policy. second, competitors are making every effort to steal our technology, research and intellectual property. as the margin of u.s. technological advances narrows and foreign efforts to acquire american increases we need to examine how to best protect our ideas, universities, labs and companies without unduly hindering innovation. we need to modernize, foreign investments screening to better protect dual use technologies like ai. we need to protect u.s. research institutions at the national assets and they need tools and resources to assess risk and share information as well a cybersecurity support. we need to elevate intellectual property policy reforms as a national security priority in light of china's effort to leverage and exploit ip policies to its own advantage. finally, to protect our country and all these areas we need to better have better intelligence. the reports makes significant judgments that the intelligence will benefit from ai than any other mission. they should integrate ai across all aspects of its work from collections to analysis. we need to empower science and technology leaders in the icy we need to leverage open source information and we need new approaches to intelligence fusion and human machine teaming to develop better insights than augment human judgment. let me close by saying that just as ai has posed to impact all sectors of society it also poses to impact all dimensions on national security. i urge congress to review the full range of gnosis security problems addressed in this report and adopt a recommendations to address them. thank you and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, commissioner louis. i deeply appreciate you lending your expertise efforts and thank you for your testimony today. will now turn to member questions and will recognize members for five minutes and i begin by mechanism myself for five minutes. doctor schmidt, mr. louis, are there better ways that dod could leverage industry and academia to field ai systems more quickly than going through the normal acquisition pipeline and will the software acquisition pathway by way of example provide in the fy 2020 nda and the budget activity software budgeting pilots help dod efforts? >> thank you, mr. chairman. the pathway you all provided is helpful but is not sufficient in the cultural aspects of training people to treat software differently has taken or has been harder and taken longer than i thought. i do know many suffer companies who want to work with the government and in particular with the dod and they cannot find a corresponding customer or user or buyer or someone who can work with them and my own view is that the dod should set up some kind of technology insertion program where they literally go and try to get the stuff and because it's so strategic and so important to the mission of the dod. >> thank you, doctor schmidt. software and ai are joined at the hip and until the department is able to acquire software as a software, not as hardware, not in the form of block of grids but as consumed as a fuel that fuels our system we have a saying that we did back with many of us worked that we said software is something that never ends and it's a continual process but all our acquisitions are designed for building big systems in these monolithic upgrades. our adversaries are not doing that. for us to be competitive and for us to have the best software as it's happening we need to reform on how we do it. a single known what is a but it is only a start. the culture needs to change many professionals who know how to acquire software and understand the basic underpinnings of ai. >> very good, thank you doctor louis. i could continue with you, commissioner louis. we are all aware that china views talent essential to its technological advancement. the commission addresses many recommendations to the u.s. need to attract and retain the best talent to study, live and work in the united states. can you speak to why this is so important to our national security and how others will capitalize on our policies if we do not find a way to keep the best talent here? >> sure, first of all china realizes they have a major disadvantage when it comes to attracting talent. talent comes to democracy where good ideas flourish and individuals can chase their own pursuits in order to improve research and development. in doing so we must not give away that advantage and we attract the best and the brightest from all over the world for the past 50 years. it's a fundamental u.s. advantage in the chinese realize that they cannot compete with our top 1% and their strategy is to use their talent to apply what we discover and that discovery capability lies in our ability to work, not only in our universities and research labs from individuals both from here domestically and from all over the world but to share those ideas in the open and shared platform. it's called open science. china is not an open society and it does not believe in open science. we do, please don't give up that advantage. >> well said, commissioner. finally, doctor schmidt, of all your recommendations that focus on the department of defense and its adoption of ai what do you believe the commission's most consequential recommendations that congress has not yet acted upon? >> there are many and commissioner there are many aspects of the recommendations run talent that have not been adopted. in particular, retaining specialized talent and the other issue has to do with revelatory structure. as you highlighted in your earlier comments the regulations are essentially antithetical to prioritizing ai and they are built around a large weapon systems of a hardware kind and the real strength of our nation will come from the strength of our software and ai activities. >> commissioner, did you have anything to add? >> sure, i will say there are three general areas and i don't have a single answer so with your forbearance i will give you three. first is under leadership and strategy and we think that tried share steering committee is absolutely central to provide the top-down leadership and push for the integration of ai throughout the force. having the day rock as the cochair or i'm sorry, having the undersecretary of defense is the cochair will make sure that technology and capabilities and requirements are absolutely synced up. under enabling the resources processing and organizational constructs getting that common digital infrastructure which means a secure cloud we hope we can get to a secure cloud for the department but having algorithmic libraries et cetera and having jake established as the ai accelerator is probably the most important thing at the applications level. under accelerated adoption it is trying to get these teams out to the field and out to the [inaudible]. doctor schmidt and i visited so come for example what they're doing doing down there where the combatant commander himself has taken this as a personal mission and established the talent and team to push it has really seen some remarkable advances in special operations capabilities. we need to have those same type of teams and approaches in the endo pacific command and european command so thinking of it in terms of leadership, enabling resources and processes and accelerating adoption would be the three things that i would say are the most consequential. >> thank you, secretary work. thank you all for your answers. with that ranking member is now recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. an idea that each witness and each commissioner has highlighted today as well as the chair of the government over form committee is for the academy and now the issue of workforce and talent is going to make or break whether the united states is able to lead in a ipad my question is for chairman schmidt. can you expand on this recommendation to include how such an academy should be established and then i want to hear what had been the impediments to this recommendation? >> if it is okay i would prefer that commissioner clyburn answer. >> thank you again very much. the need is very clear. we have a college pipeline and so the commission was very bold in its recommendation and it recognizes that there are a number of impediments and many are economic and so what we attempted to do here was to identify what could be a platform that would be targeted when it comes to stem education and unapologetic about educating to meet the needs that we have in government from a civilian point of view and this academy is part of the solution. part of the things i have heard that may be less embracing is what does it mean in terms of the other service academy and we need another institution and so how expensive willoughby and how long will it be to onboard and it is not going to be expensive but take up to seven years to graduate the first class but what i would say is that pipeline problems that i mentioned everyone knows that it is there and we need to be big, bold and targeted and intentional and this is one way we thought it was unwaveringly obvious that we were serious about addressing the pipeline deficit. >> may i? >> sure, go ahead. >> let me add a number of universities have offered to help us get the set up and as the legislation proceeds as we described and it should ultimately be very good economically because of the payback requirement. if you graduate you have to work for five years and we strongly endorse this idea. >> i appreciate that and think this will be one of the most important ways and important strategies that we need to work on a bipartisan basis to embrace in order to make sure that we maintain a competitive edge. ... >> are there any steps we can take now to address this, deficit before 2025 or before the seven years with the digital service academy, and if yes what are the steps? >> thank you for that and forgive me for struggle with your name. >> it's okay. >> one of the things we recommend is an agency specific digital core and if would be modeled after the army is medical corps. this would allow for specialized personnel and policies and dialog for promotion. one of the issues when i mentioned those who have left government is there was no way to stay on track and get promoted and for us to benefit from that. the national preserve digital core again and other civilian track modeled after the other reservist opportunities. we can quickly get those committed and on board to offer 38 days a year for service. they could triage, i could p and assist and could augment. the scholarship come we have scholarship service programs that we need to expand and we need to expand sieber, again the cyber corps for a civilian, scholarship service. that would be nfs manager that would allow those who qualified were in an agency. there are some things we can do right now that will ensure our pipeline while we wait for the first graduating class. >> thank you so much, commissioner clyburn. thank you, chairman schmidt and all the commissioners for your emphasis on the workforce challenge. yield back. >> thank you very much, mr. phonic. i recognize -- >> chairman work what are to make a comment. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first of all and want to thank the panel for all of your work. first of all come today in person i think speaks to the urgency of the issue and we appreciate that. and also we are thankful for this report. normally in congress when we see a 750 page document we assume it was compiled for the purpose of defending itself against the risk of being read, but i'm happy to say that your document is an exception. i want to just point out to my colleagues and that staff that in appendix d come so not only did make recommendations about what might be done to address the problem but includes draft legislation in rudimentary form so it's all worked out pretty much. it can be refined a bit but it's a head start on a lot of the work that we are engaged in here at the capital and i appreciate your work. i do want to follow up on the inquiry regarding several of you have talked about the dearth of talent and the fact we've got to get more young people into the pipeline. i am a cosponsor of the bill for the academy, but i fed a similar problem in my own district. i represent a big part of boston. a lot of jobs mcnary that are being created were really heavily reliant on math and science background. in the traditional public schools we were not getting that so i actually found it a charter school that triples did not math and science that kids would have gotten had begun to the traditional public schools. there's a lot of schools around the country that are doing this both traditional public schools and charter schools. is there a way we might be able to incentivize that type of activity? we've got to not just think about people who might serve in government tomorrow literally but also increasing that or animating that pursuit around issues like sieber, artificial intelligence, humor, some in other areas that are coming at us at a pace that is unprecedented. the velocity of change is breathtaking in terms of what we are grasping, you know, both in comics but also in our society. is there a way we might incentivize that learning a much lower level than we're talking about for this academy? >> yes, sir, i believe we can. i think we need to demystify what stan is or what steen is. when people hear about that they think it's for a certain segment of the community. they don't recognize if the young person creates the type of product, i decided that creates the stacks, that's science. what we need to do i think a better job of messaging is saying this is what it is. it is a part of your everyday, you do, your everyday culture. this is science. this is engineering. we need to help our teachers become better facilitators and supportive. supported. we really need to recognize some of the existing cultural barriers when it comes to especially women and underrepresented groups. so after school programs is important. we need in all the above approach in order to erase some of the challenges that you see. kudos to you for starting the charter school with that focus. >> mr. chairman, we are about to consider several immigration bills in congress to we've already begun debate about that. we are being put together. is there an opportunity for us to use the visa program and that immigration bill as a way of getting talent? i see canada does a very good job at this. there's a little tension between the chinese government and the canadian government because canada has been so successful in recruiting several the top line talent from china and asia. i tend to think we should be doing the same thing using the promise of america to attract some of the talent that would like to get to work in some of the issues we have in the country. is there a way to do that through our upcoming immigration debate? >> there is no question that the united states will be stronger if we encourage high skilled immigration. in the last administration mostly what would happen is that the visas would be very difficult to get and that companies would park employees in places like canada, vancouver and so forth waiting for the h-1b lottery. this is not in america's interest. everything we can do to get high skilled immigration into the right places is welcomed. the argument is relatively simple. if we don't welcome them they will create companies and efforts in countries that may ultimately not be consistent with the best interest. the other obvious point is once we let them in the country or once we educate them in the country we need to give them some way of staying in the country consistent with the law and their good behavior. it's stupid frankly if i may say that to fully educate a brilliant quantum physicist and then send him to china where he creates a quantum physics program that competes with our military activities which indeed is what we did. >> gilman, you have something to add. >> thank you, dr. smith -- dr. schmidt. we had specific recommendations in a report. we should expand our visa programs. we have many talented individuals who will want to stay in the united states but you don't through it to the classical means of having published reports in things like nature. for that that is terrific that ai is moving so rapidly we need to open our aperture i.t. should be eligible for that type of visa. second, we want entrepreneurs, entrepreneurs who come to the united states to create jobs for americans and we should develop and expand that lane for individuals particularly in these areas of high composition and science and technology. we want those entrepreneurs. want them to create jobs here and build great american businesses. finally we made a recommendation. with the appropriate screening in place, we believe that anybody receiving and doctorate degrees and science, technology area or areas of critical requirements should be granted a visa. we want these individuals to stay, not go back and develop capabilities elsewhere. [inaudible] >> thank you, chairman lynch. yes. >> i was just going to say, this goes back to ranking member question. we look at this, we want to explore our homegrown talent we want to attract worldwide, and we wanted to id and use the talent we have on hand. so exploiting homegrown talent, commissioner cliburn continually just said look, we've got a lot of people who want to get into skin. they don't have the opportunity to do because they can't afford to go to college. so the national research, the national digital corps, national preserve digital corps was designed to do just that. it's like the rotc program. anybody can apply. they give a full ride and when they graduate they would owe, 38 days a a year like a national guard counsel in the national guard where two days out of every month they would come into a unit and say how can ai for these advanced technologies help you accomplish your mission better? i'm here to help you do that. and then two weeks out of the year they go to a military exercise and say gee, if you just applied machine learning in this particular application you're going to be 15 times more effective. that was really trying to attract homegrown talent. the national -- the digital academy is designed to get people into the government for a long period of time so we can exploit them. attracting worldwide talent, commissioner louie and commissioner clyburn, have already talked about this. but the third thing i wanted to say which we haven't talked is there's a lot of talent in the department of defense right now. these young men and women many of them are great coders. all they want to do is have an opportunity to get on a software development team and they were rock the world. many of the suggestions we have is how you identify those people, give them a classifier that we can follow and assign, and that's how we're confident we can get to 2025 before we are getting 700 700 graduates fe digital academy. so we took it from a holistic view, mr. chairman. >> thank you for that. >> mr. grothman, ranking member grothman is now recognized for five minutes. >> sure, a few questions. i didn't anticipate the debate you would wind up over immigration but it's an interesting topic. do you think we should have some sort of math and science test as we decide who's going to be able to immigrate into this country? [inaudible] >> i don't think your microphone is on. >> i think math and science is critical. i think particularly in our recommendations for the doctorate, clearly as think he should be one of the testing variables we should be looking at -- s nt. that's that's the talent we need in this country and we should be very explicit to the rest of the world. want to come to the united states and be sure, and use welfare, we welcome you. >> passively. when i talk to immigrants a very the sometimes complain that the smartest people are going to australia and new zealand and canada and we're getting the ones who are not. if the chairman wants to put a a math and science requirement on immigration policy, we can look at. we talked about ways the government getting more involved in ai. all of the areas of the the government that you think will be able to be cut as we improve in artificial intelligence, since presumably it will improve a provider of things. all of a sudden now chairman schmidt put the mask on. it's great seeing you without the mask. >> i'm trying to follow the rules, bob. do you want to answer the government question? >> you sent shivers down my spine, , because now i'm going back to my time as a deputy secretary and every time a question like this comes up, i would always say to answer. but generally we know that ai is going to have a tremendous impact all the back offices processes in the department of defense and the federal government. it will become more efficient and you will require fewer people to do the work. i would expect this to have some reduction in the overall total workforce as ai is completely implemented across the government and in the department of defense. >> so you think would be a good idea to have targets right now? you know what happens come nobody ever wants to cut the government. one of the benefits of artificial intelligence is that it should make things more streamlined and reduce the number of positions, but people are under don't like to do that and that's one can ask you right now so we know in advance when we're putting together the budget in 2028 where we can expect to have reductions in personnel. >> i think it's reasonable to expect that some of the overhead functions will be smaller, and that the specialized functions will be larger. the easiest way to achieve that would be not to do what you are describing but instead puts some guidance on the kind of people that are being hired now. hiring takes quite a while. so the government loses 10% of employed spirit and is hiring 10% come some number like that, you all would know the exact number, you could establish a threshold that among the new hires that occur every year a certain percentage of them have to meet science and technology type threshold come specialize threshold. that would achieve your objective without having to go through the fighting over budgets argument. >> we are really focused on the people, not the money. because of people will drive everything else. >> i also think that the other part of the equation here is increasing the productivity of our people. our adversaries are not holding back. china has only set out its goals to compete with the u.s. in ai by 2025 and made in china 2025. just past use capabilities by 2030 and to win in any domain anywhere in the world and any kind of hostile action by 2049. the issue is not so much the savings but where do we deploy our talent? where do we put them in places where they will be the most productive, and how will we compete with an adversary whose commit its entire nation to win in the fourth industrial revolution? we need to meet that challenge head-on. we need to deploy our personnel, educate them and skill then to fight for this next arms race. >> what majors right now an american colleges if you get a mage in that signals you would be good in the ai field? >> mathematics currently. statistics, for example, something we should be teaching in our high schools because it's critical of the way we're thinking. second, even if you are in non-s&t areas understanding how ai, which you can trust before come what you need to augment it with, what you need to question about it with the critically important as well. >> i would follow my knees and biomedical engineering. >> -- my niece. >> are good news. universities universities are generally seen a huge supply of computer science graduates and majors, and in virtually every university i have studied computer science is now the number one major ahead if, for example, economics which is sort of a big surprise. that workforce is coming into the private sector. it's that come into the government sector the way it should be. in the private sector to get to work on this stuff as with her, they need to do this, that and so forth. we met a brilliant, doing a review in the national security council, a brilliant young man who is busy doing cyber attacks analysis, and asked what was his career path? he said next week i'm being transferred to a non-technical position in another part of my rotation. that's insane and that's how the government works. we need to address those issues and those are covered in our report. >> thank you for giving the additional time. >> thank you, ranking member crossman. mr. larson is now recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for recognizing me. 20 years ago when it came to conversation think i ever would've predicted 20 years that i would a set of really excited to read a report on ai. but i am. two particular sections or pages. i'm really excited about pages 77 and 78, and about 297 through 300. those are the education bits. mr. work, i'll let you know. you don't have to read them in. but on that a few years back we include in the ndaa direction to develop an ai education strategy, which they're beginning to roll out. my vision of it is to go as deep as possible with as many folks. if i could just ask the guys on the clock to reset the time. sorry about that. i think every woman and man in uniform, civilian and the dod should have at some basic i education. they don't have to be coders. it they don't have to be the os leading the project. let's have some basic education, which is why page 77 is interesting, excited about having an ai dude you ready -- dod ready and so on. and then getting to pages 297-300 implement think that even more. i want to start with you, commissioner clyburn. what exactly, you know, is your vision within the dod on ai education? metaphor needs a coder, and everyone needs to be writing the software but my idea is the should at least understand the weapon they are using, whether it's in electronic or software weapon or hardware weapon the weapon some else is using against us. what is the vision of the commission when you came up with these recommendations? [inaudible] >> microphone. >> it was a recognition that the next major conflict will likely not be on the ground but it would be ai inspired. so you're right, from headquarters to the tactical edge it's how we phrase it. i really embrace that. we have to be ai ready. we have to be ai trained. those who protect us shouldn't that digital foundation. those who excel in computational thinking within the ranks they should be identified and supportive. it's a shame we are losing that talent, and they should be able to advance. we need up skill within the ranks. junior officers from the beginning need to be trained and ai concepts, and the need to continually be educated and certified. so we can't stand still. we cannot ignore the fact that again we are in an ai -- we might not recognize it but we're in revolution and we need to be prepared. >> did you look at the jake's current education strategy with these recommendations? >> yes, we did and i will yield the rest of my time to mr. work. >> i was going to him, good. >> i would just like to start, sir, and it were, dr. andrew form of carnegie mellon now at google is one of our commissioners who leads the line of everyone which is a research and development line of effort. i remember quite clearly the first time he was talking to us, and he said look, you can get a lot accomplished with young men and women who are not a computer science graduate but what they have to do is understand is computational thinking. that had a big impact on the way we were thinking of this because he made the case there's lots of innate talent in the four. >> we just have to identify those people. he recommended, for example, if we gave just one class like at the seventh grade and another class in the 11th grade on computational thinking, that you would have people who graduate it would be immediately able to step on to a cocom development team. this but as to say we ought to add a section on competition thinking in the armed forces, armed services vocational aptitude battery. and identify those folks so that we could do it. competition thinking is as important for the hold force as the hard-core phds who would go into dedicated rnd billets. that would be one thing that i would say we all need to think about, , how we would do that ad would recommend a new national defense education act two, and i would recommend that congress think about should there be computational thinking type requirements that we establish to allow the entire workforce that's going into the government and into commercial sector, academia, et cetera, to expand these things. also would like to go back to one of the things -- >> if i could, i'm sorry. i'll be really quick cure with the question. we talked in the past about china's declared policy and want to lead by 2030 nso why do we have declared policy? we will lead by 2020 and could do it. we had no idea how china is going to do it. frankly whether or not they're successful, it will probably say they are leading, in my view. why do we just have declared policy we will eat in ai? does being ai ready by 2025 ndu d is used in newport to set equate with the general u.s. leadership if we do the things in this report? >> if you could answer briefly. >> it's a component but not sufficient. we call for technology competitive council to cover not just the other some of the other key areas is crucial the united states have a national plan for competitiveness globally to addresses ai, semiconductors, synthetic bio and a few others, energy, et cetera. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman for the indulgence. thank you. >> thank you, mr. larson. the ranking member mr. rogers is now recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. can you hear me? >> yes, i can. >> dr. schmidt, just to follow up, is china leading ai? >> we spent a lot of time looking at that question, and in general we are a little bit ahead but not very much. they have more people coming here we're doing better in algorithms that they are coming. they are doing better in some industries, in particular financial transactions, electronic commerce and surveillance. we are doing better in some other areas of research. it's a close race at the moment we are ahead. our reports specifically says we can lose our lead within a few years. >> i share the observation. this commission does great work, this report is not just going to sit on a cell. -- on the show. we're going to do some stuff that is really meaningful so want to commit all of you. thank you for your time in putting this together because it's going to make a difference. commissioner clyburn, i wanted to follow up on the questions about how we can get folks into these jobs earlier than seven your timeline. are there scholarship opportunities we can provide people now to go to existing universities? we had some find existing universities in this country back and can give some peope trained earlier while we stand at the digital surge in getting the first two people through their. >> we talk about the reserve officer training corps. we talk about expanding the cyber corps scholarship for service program that is managed, that is in place. so yes, sir, and there's some things that outside of that that i think of possible. being targeted and sending the signal, if you were to highlight just the two of three things i mentioned, i think i will encourage others to follow. it's that down payment that we should make with the existing programs and others modeled after successful programs that are think will make the difference and enable us to move in the right direction. >> let me also add that not every field requires a degree. >> exactly. >> we have great enlisted force, amazing. these kids know all about ai how do i know that? they are playing on their video games. what they are missing is the linkage between what they're seeing in those games and what they're saying in the department of defense. so with the appropriate certification program we could also get our enlisted teams up and ready and ai certified in writing. >> that's what i was getting at. >> imagine if you had a call for talent when there were some kind of a test and the competition. i think all of the commissioners would say to you you are going to be really pleasantly surprised by the existing talent in the government that is not correctly being used. >> and i agree. that's one of things i was hoping, when we had this structure set up, digital services cabinet, that is not just focused on getting people abyei or ms or phd at the part of the folks and get certified to get it into in the workforce right away. i also hope, when we first talked about this concept with dr. schmidt about a year ago and very excited about it, i'm curious to know do you envision this being a purely public sector we stand up will be public-private partnership? heidi think it will be structured? and also i would ask this. obviously this committees concern with the defense department making sure we can defend ourselves with these technology and skilled workforce but as you know the department foments gritty, mr. chairman,,, other agencies that have same shortfall and cyber and digital employees. can you see this or envision this one did the open of two other agencies within the federal government? >> we foresee immediately being available for all the federal activities, and i always prefer public partner -- public-private partnership, excuse me, ppp, for the reasons that i think that's when america is strongest. >> great. >> i'm sorry. allow me a bite at the apple. i could not go back home without affirming that the two-year colleges offer substantial support and opportunities, and they don't just offer to your degrees. offer other certifications that will enable this so i couldn't go back, without mentioning that. >> i'm glad you did because that's exactly what i was thinking about. it's a resource we need to be tapping into because it would help fill a need that we've got here commissioner louie, do you believe the private sector -- department of defense or government owned, national security issues involving ai and cyber? >> i had the fortune opportunity a standing up in-q-tel. there were a lot of people that he against it. ask the question, why would a young entrepreneur walk across the road and ring the doorbell of in-q-tel or federal intelligence agency? turns out that there are plenty of americans who want to serve and put their technologies in the way that protects this country. there are some of course you will opt out and that's the american way. we are not china. we do not compel companies and individuals to work for the government or give up their information. that sets as different in a different better place that i think our competitors. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> very good. thank you for the questions. the the chair now recognizes mr. welch for five minutes. >> thank you very much. really appreciate this hearing and the work of the commission. one of the frustrations that i experiencing in listening to this is that there appears to be a consensus, bipartisan consensus on the absolute urgency of following the recommendations that you make. yet on a practical level there's impediments for us doing it. some are bureaucratic and to some extent potentially congressional. i will start with you, dr. schmidt. you mentioned the people who are the most important. but if they are in a structure where the mission is about overcoming obstacles that has been integrated that mission into its stated policy, how do we overcome that? >> part of our recommendations as chairman work recommended earlier is to take the ai efforts and cause him to report higher inside the military, and in the military because it's very hierarchical, having ai be a major component of strategy at every level is one of the ways the top down can work. i always save a top-down and bottoms up approach so i would like to see at the ud statement read ai that is much stronger than we currently have. i would also like to have a high reporting level, more resource and so forth but i would also like to have individual control at the commander level and the cocom level where they are flexible teams which can be used to solve important national security problems which will include ai expertise. you want to give flexibility for the commanders as well as priority at the highest level. >> missed work let me go to you. thank you for that. what are the implications, decisions that ai is our corps -- to our defense worth versus -- [inaudible] with respect to how would it affect other weapons systems as well as what you said we have a huge platforms that have been components, major components of our defense strategy and it appears that ai, cyber warfare is really the biggest threat. can you just elaborate i what would be involved in a pentagon shift in thinking and, frankly, i congressional shift in thinking where implications would affect jobs in any members districts? >> we do not talk about this specifically in the report, but very broadly, mr. welch, we are shifting into an era of systems warfare. both our adversaries -- i mean, our adversaries explicitly say this and say the way we will defeat the u.s. military is to have better operational systems. and the better way, and the way to get there is to inject ai applications and autonomy into the system so operates at a faster feed and can operate more effectively. this is a big shift in thinking going from platform like thinking the systems thinking and tried to figure out how these applications improve. in my view all you need to have is cross functional teams that look at say our sensor grid and the cross functional teams is the biggest return on investment is to do machine learning on the sensor so that they can go to the information and just pass on the data that is required, which would make everything go faster, wooden clog the pipes, et cetera. you would get someone to the same thing for our command control and communications and intelligence grids. how would we haven't ai enabled application that would help decision-making -- have. this will literally affect every operation, mission that we do. it's going to require a a different way of training our commanders and our people, different with educating them and a different way of training them. >> it also requires the content of defense leaders that a change in direction is not only desirable for really essential that has implications on the way we're doing business now. would you care to comment in my remaining 12 seconds? >> a man, sir. it all starts with trust. as soon as we demonstrated applications enough to wear commanders trust them, then you will see an accelerated adoption but trust is absolutely key. >> and education starts at the top and continues through the ranks. >> thank you. thank you, commissioner. thank you all. >> thank you, mr. welch. [inaudible] >> thank you, mr. chairman. for some reason when i turn on my mic my video goes off, but there goes the video. i hope you can hear me. thank you for having this hearing, and it's been very, very informative and very enlightening. and it's nice to see bipartisan agreement. mr. schmitt, i know you're most comfortable from your days at google, but why should we create a monopoly in 5g? why should one company in concert with the department f defense have a monopoly on 5g spectrum when having multiple facilities-based competition is what made the u.s. 4g market so successful? and why the economy originated here? >> our report is not specifically suggest what you just asked me about, but let me, in general, that we've taken a look at the 5g situation, and china is perhaps ten times ahead of us both in terms of speed as well as the number of towers. they have planned 1.3 million towers for example, visscher in total and looks like the leadership that china is going to have in 5g will become a significant national security threat to the united states. partly because 5g is used in autonomy which we discussed in our report, and also because it will create an ecosystem of applications. imagine if the key applications that are used five years from now are based on the chinese thank you network and not on american 5g leadership. over the last decade we've essentially given up leadership in that area after having done a fantastic job in 4g. my view is if it's a national security problem, that we are not leading in 5g, i will let you all debate the specific solutions to that. i would encourage you to demand a strategy from the various players that gets us at least equal to china in terms of performance and coverage. >> well thank you for that. it's been reported that the spectrum sharing arrangement would constitute a boon for alphabet and of the big tech firms. they seem to be the nationalization of our spectrum market than anything else. to be blunt, i think all of our constituents to remind everyone to hear from our tired of the stranglehold the tech firms have over the markets. the unchecked power of big tech ability to corner markets to marginalize competitors and silence my fellow americans cannot be tolerated any further. with that, congress shouldn't be empowering markets mobilization -- monopolization in this critical space. our 5g infrastructure created digital highways and artifil intelligence can drive on, and this congress should not be risking our competitive advantage over china by investing in this untested, unproven nationalization framework. doing so we put 5g development rural broadband projects and even national security at risk. as i've said i believe there's bipartisan concern about the tax antitrust problems. >> that i respond, madam? so first place and no longer working out of have large stock position and alphabet. alphabet is not one of the beneficiaries of any of these large activities at the moment. the argument you're making about sharing is not just technically correct. your argument is fundamentally fed would be better to have high would occupy by one car rather than having highway have lots of different cars on. the cd rs auction which is in 3.5 gigahertz space proves sharing works. we need to software bandwidth problem. i'm personally, i've my own tactical views of how to solve this edit do not want to allow your statement to go unchallenged with respect to the statement that we are okay. we're not okay and we need a solution into space that is competitive with china. let me at since is of the co-authors on the 5g report for defense information board. we're not in favor of monopolies. do not use these that one company should own it all. that's fundamentally anti-american. on the other side of that equation, , for us to be competitive in 5g. we need to have large continuous blocks of spectrum available and not in a little small segments. think of it like this. think of going down the freeway and which you sell each lane to a particular company. you cannot change your lane once you get on that road. sharing particularly in the spectrum is the only way to allow broader use of spectrum and protect our military system, raiders, our air to air, , surfe to air, our satellite calms require sharing without that sharing will not be competitive. the u.s. ig is one of the slowest in the world. less than 50 megabits. compared to china, which is going at 300 megabits, going to one gigabit. we want to be competitive and what ai to ride on information highway. we've got to free up the lane. one car a length is not a solution. >> very good. >> i want to -- [inaudible] >> briefly. time has expired but briefly. >> i want to push certification, mr. chairman. i think we need to get alternatives to baccalaureate degrees and push certification where we can. thank you for indulging me. >> certainly. thank the gentlelady for her questions. mr. khanna is now recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, chairman, and thank you to dr. schmidt and particularly commissioner clyburn, and all the commissioners for your excellent work. before i get to my question i do have to address what probably could be the headline of the hearing, representative lofgren comments that somehow the smartest immigrant are going to australia and new zealand and we're not getting the smartest immigrants. i've a number of comments but i guess just for educational purposes, maybe dr. schmidt, could you comment on the intelligence of -- i don't -- how would you characterize the quote-unquote intelligence of immigrants coming to the united states? >> americans benefited enormously from high skilled immigration or i present beee beneficiary of the companies i've been working for. we were founded by such people come at their incredibly brilliant. we need them to drive our tech sector. we need to great wealth in a stock market. we need them to help pay the taxes for our government. i can go on and on about the quality of immigration. at one point i was sitting at google and i realized half the people in senior executives were immigrants, many of them from southern asia. >> the other thing i think i understood, congressman, we should have some kind of math and science requirement for immigrants. think the american public with the given that francie requirement for of congress. i think that would probably be a better start. i would challenge congressman grothman, , maybe you and i can take a math and science test and that some of our immigrants also take a hypothetical test, and my guess is it wouldn't be surprised with the results are. i hope you'll take me up on that. what do the commissioners think is the idea of having a math or science test for immigrants? i don't understand, madison and jefferson put that in the constitution that we should have math scores for who we should let into this country. would any of the commissioners please comment on that statement? >> i'm happy to answer at least part of it. the particular line of questioning around having science and technology skills for our recommended thesis for anybody with a degree in united states is pretty straightforward. i don't think any of us are advocating we should have a generic test like the way you had to pass the other immigration examination on american citizenship or any of the kinds of activities. but we need site and technology skills here that is clear. we will not be competitive without that talent. we need to grow thin internally and get them from outside. and we need to encourage people who were educated in this country, by our very best universities both public and private to allow them to practice their knowledge in the united states and not abroad. >> absolutely i agree that used to be clear, you could clearly disagree with the suggestion somehow we should have a math or science requirement for our immigrants? >> i don't believe that was the question i was answering. >> i am saying you would disagree with the statement that, correct? the commissioner would. >> i don't think anyone in america a reasonable person things we should have requirements for immigrants to take math and science tests. >> in the excess of clarity, the report does not make a claim in this area and so speaking for the commission the commission does not take a position on this. we have said repeatedly, high skills immigration in our nation is very important. >> let me just change directions, because i was just so struck by those comments. i thought he had to be addressed. let me ask the final question, which is on ai, a two-part question. one, it seems to me it is in our country's they vanish to move towards forms of ai, and when you look at some of the work jeff hawkins has done how the human mind works in terms of maps of reference angela got mit and what they're being able to do, saying a child doesn't need thousands of pictures to understand what a cat is. but understanding high categories of human perception works. it would be valuable for the united states to invest in that kind of general learning ai so that we're not dependent on data because china love huge advantage over data. if you could address that, then second address what it means for us to human judgment, she would control so the defense decisions are not being just made by algorithms by ai but by people who really still have human judgment over that. >> quick and to do the first part, rob, you'll take the second part. you're exactly right that right now these algorithms need an enormous amount of data. there's very promising research about much more limited data training models and if it eventually this issue run data will become less important and the rise of this next generation of algorithms that you suggested would be the story. it's crucially important this next generation of algorithms get invented in the united states. bob? >> darpa describes a coming in three ways. the first wave was what are referred to as expert systems. these are physics-based models that are quite capable, but they have now been supplanted by second wave systems which are statistical machine learning. there are a lot of applications still for first wave systems work so i would agree with you that there will be applications that just are physics-based models or rules-based models, if then. they are very, very good to explain, like if you had a safety accident, you can go back to the coding and say this is exactly what caused the accident. and a machine learning sometimes we won't know exactly why the algorithm chose the action that it did. as far as defense decisions, the clearest expression i can offer you, sir, is du dd come department of defense directive 3000.09, for example, that says for weapons with autonomous functionalities, they will be designed and operated to maintain appropriate human judgment over the use of force, hipaa come into story. the dod of law or manual say you cannot transfer responsibility to machine under any circumstances. so in my view department of defense has been very clear then when it comes to decisions over human life, that will always be a human making those decisions. we also make a clear recommendation that we should declare that machines will never ever be given the authority to order a preemptive nuclear strike. the use of nuclear weapons should be off the table, and we should enter into discussions with all of our rifles to see if everyone would agree with that -- rifles. >> let me just add -- thank you. >> briefly. time expired. >> just quickly. we were very clear not only in 3000.09 that we must nine we must continue to comply with international you met your loss. that's is separates the u.s. them some of our competitors, and that humans, commanders be held accountable for the deployment of any such weapons onto the battlefield. >> it's why, i will just comment, why it's come with a international engagement and leadership on ai, although we may do things that way, other countries are not as funny to us may do things very differently. we can't let that happen so international engagement will be critical on that topic going forward. thank you for your questions. >> thank you. >> mr. moran is now recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm encouraged by commissioner clyburn's focus on retention. it reflects many of my concerns about a grade retention issue that we have across all branches of military among active-duty labor force. admittedly while i music committee and new to my time in congress, from early in my tenure some of that is anecdotal as i speak with fighter pilots in the off tempo that incentives to go to the private sector are great and it's growing in that regard. i have big concerns and hope to use my time in this committee to address that. and so with that same thought process, i want to make sure that we are not going down the same path, maybe as we talk about potential of an academy which with bipartisan support something i could very well be excited about. it is five years? this concept of just putting a time an audit what your expected to do, is that enough or going to see some of the same issues that assume is that five-year timeline kind of hits there's so much need in the private sector right now with ai and cybersecurity. are we going to see that same retention or attrition issues there? i will address a question to transport any of you are welcome to comment, thank you. >> could add something ahead of commission clyburn? i was really struck in my work with the defense department of how many people were to bear from low pay and in difficult conditions because they were patriotic. the ones that i spoke with did not fundamentally leave for money. they left because the opportunity in their career was interesting in the private sector, that the work they wanted to do they could not do while as federal or military employees. that's got to get fixed. to provide leadership at the national level we are going to have places for these people to serve while they're in the government. this is true not just of dod but in aspects of the federal government. we believe these people to exist, we believe they are already injured employee and we believe they are underutilized. to me that's a big priority for this committee to think about, how do we create it so we keep these people rather than allow them to become disaffected and leave for higher-paying jobs? but commissioner clyburn. >> i would do something that is unusual and be brief. i believe what we can do and what we should do is to ensure that the tools and infrastructure inside of government, for those who want to stay, who are willing to stay, as a chairman mentioned, that they have the tools needed in order to be productive, in order to be challenged, in order for us to meet our national security objectives. that's the biggest issue. it's the frustration inside of the infrastructure that needs to be fixed. if we fix that, i don't think we will have as much of a retention problem. those who want to write after money would do so but there are more people who want to serve but they're not going to go to work every day and get frustrated about the advancing, being on board and love the other issues we enumerate in this or hundred 50 plus pagef light reading. >> and our discussions, the ai commission in my work, it's pretty clear we had a large number of junior officers departing. the reason why they were departing was a cousin of the lack of understanding by their senior officers of what these technologies can do. that frustration forced them to go choose employment elsewhere. they are committed to this country. there committed to the services but we need to educate our seniors come not just our junior officers. >> in the incredible amount of bureaucracy that does exist in these situations, i think that gets to a lot of your point. i support that and hope to be a part of finding ways forward for the labor force be engaged and committed to the continuing workforce. a lot of great things to have such good training at the government level. we do have to address this. i appreciate those comments, and hope to work with you on all of that. thank you. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. moore. mr. this on your is recognized for five minutes. is he there? >> i always wondered say this, you are unmute. >> i just have to have the mental adeptness to return to -- remember to turn minute on, mr. chairman. thank you. i just want to concur with my call it from the bay area about immigration. .. control of hundreds of thousands or even millions of computers to advance those schemes using ai and botnets. we know from our investigations with past elections and of all the reports and all these reviews we know how they are used domestically and for foreign so the commission again says its report that this may become more powerful with advanced ai, not just directly spent spreading out harvesting both computerization power and data to put forth further offensive training in ways that were not previously possible. mister bloomington, can you talk about this threat to our infrastructure, transportation utilities and also financial please >> this is a real threat to our critical infrastructure . as problematic as the botnets are, ai driven but operating machine speed test our defenses which have still people in the loop rather than on the loop and it's a losing strategy and a clear cost our adversaries are using not only advanced technologies like botnets, they're going after supply chains with the solarwinds attack and they're using it in disinformation campaigns and the next step is using it against machines. to give machines disinformation and make machines do the wrong thing. that's adversarial and it's a real class and mister louis just following up there is a section that the commissioner recommends us acting in sector for, could you talk about the comments or the ability that to help stem this threat, pardon the choice of words and what we might do in addition to this class is clear we have to defend and have a defensive posture waiting for the attack and try to be promoted as a failed strategy. we have to work with our allies. is there a criminal activity, we need to raise the cost of those activities of those individuals in nationstates prosecuting the attack against us. right now the cost to attack is so low the consequences are almost nonexistent that we are inviting attack after attack after attack and we will not stand it by simply having a higherwall outside fence . could i had representative, the traditional framing this is the rush of election attacksin 2016 . which were done by humans, not by computers as best we can tell . there's every reason to think that not only will a country like russia tried to do this but many nonaligned groups, terrorist groups and unrelated groups trying to disrupt the democratic processes of democratic countries for whatever reason. economic, financial, political, just evil because technologies are now so broadly available so one of the things we talk about in the book is that the software diffusion. the ability for people to access it now, whatever metaphor you care about, we've got to get ourselves organized around the fact that there will be continuous tax on our information space which you are describing as box but they are really more than that. it's attacks in terms of the quality of information, target information, attacks on individuals involved just using their personal information and this is alsoa national security issue moving forward . class i had a sophistication in neuro- targeting not just individuals and demographics but as you know, doctor schmidt if i could take this opportunity because you are here and that somebody from the bay area who's proud of our tech industry recently has become critical and chagrined. in sense of national security we often hear about scale. it's important to have scale not just in tech but in finance so could you comment on that briefly the importance of scale to some of the challenges we had in regards to concentration to ms. fox's comments class i know there's concern about this but i'll tell you i like to win the global competition and have americawin in global competition . that's going to require large companies because of the scale issues and economic issues and number of people. the products we talk about in this economy and these companies take thousands and thousands of people and many hundreds of millions of dollars to build. so there's a problem of scale. we have a vibrant and diverse ecosystem with a lot of new startups. huge valuations, it's all incredibly exciting. it's my recommendation and it has nothing to do with the ai report by strong recommendation is if you don't like what one of the tech companies doing find a way to regulate their behavior through the normal mechanisms . i'm sure there are issues to be regulated class thank you mister chairman. i'd like tofollow-up doctor schmidtbecause we need to get the right balance here . mister chairman . >> thank you mister desaulnier and the chair recognizes mister higgins for five minutes . >> thank you mister chairman and our purpose here is crucial as we discussed last month a joint hearing with homeland security committee foreign adversaries elevated the battlefield through the cyber realm, artificial intelligence and let us not fail to observe the chinese tremendousadvancements in quantum technology . i believe it's inseparable from the conversation regardingartificial intelligence . and i would like to ask now, i want to get to my question critically because i expect the answer to be addressed. the best of our technologies as of last year, the fbi is investigating more than 1000 cases. china's theft of us technology. that's inside our universities and our government research and development laboratories. i believe i would like to, the panelists to consider how we take further action to protect our technology. the report that we are discussing today is incredible work. i believe it will be recognized as very significant work that you ladies and gentlemen have done. we thank you forit. it's going to take a lot to get our head wrapped around us . a lot say it's the first time since world war ii america's technological dominance is the backbone of which economic nuclearpower is under threat . i asked doctor schmidt to reflect upon that statement and tell america how the federal government and private sector can work together to train the next generation of patriots both civilian and military to protect our research from theft and to gain dominance in these fields. and as related to that questioni'm going to turn to you doctor schmidt . until recently, in our military academies we teach that each nation enjoys a certain degree of elements of power. that means military, geographic, economic,cultural and political . it seems to me and many of us that a new element of power must be considered as we balance our own strength against that of theworld . that would be artificial intelligence in the quantum era and it seems to me china seems to be leading the world in artificial intelligence that quantum technology. doctor schmidt, would you address that these based upon your background i believe you can give us asolid answer or at least guidance . >> thank you. two years ago china announced its strategy with a goal to dominate the following industries software, ai, energy , robots and high-speed transportation and biotech and quantum. that's my whole world. that's everything i care about. it's furthermore everything driving the renaissance in america american manufacturing and american leadership in globalplatforms . we lack a strategy as a country you work in those areas. we must organize. it's a huge issue. you highlighted the quantum issue. it should have set up quantum leadership in china is ahead of america in certain aspects of quantum work. we need to get our act together. in order to do that we need to do a number of things. the first is we need to work on our own workforce and systemic education and we also need to recognize we are dependent on foreign researchers . one of the things we did with the ai report is we discovered where were the top researchers coming from and many of the top researchers are in fact graduates coming from china who are learning and researching in our universities and are empathetic that we have to keep them coming and keep them in the country keep working on these things to help our nation so thebest solutions that i have for you , there's obviously been intellectual property theft. to the degree that occurs should be prosecuted to the fullest possibility of the law and you can imagine four times for example you can do investigation in that manner and also find ways of validating but we need these people in america working on these heart problems and we need a national strategy to implement. >> we need to get the tools to our universityresearch centers . it's really hard to come up against a nationstate. we tend to look at cyber security breaches as an it problem. our adversaries look at it as warfare and you're not going to win with that strategy. we need to better share information, create useful energy exchanges between enterprises, academia, research centers and the government . we can protect not everything but protect those things that are most vital to us . what's the point of leading in research if the other guy can simply steal it? we have to put up appropriate actions. we need stronger ip loss and have partnerships with our allies to make it expensive for those acts to continue to go unchecked. >> we need to get the tools to law enforcement in order to recognize and take action. >> i think the chairman and the panelists. mister chairman, god bless you for allowing us some indulgence with time and i yield. >> thank you mister higgins, mister kim is nowrecognized for five minutes .>> 90 chairman, thank you everybody for coming together and i had the chance to go through the report at length and sat down with your staff. i've gone through that and feel good about the recommendations and i'm grateful for your work on but i want to take a step back here. as we're looking at something that would be potentially just a major undertaking in terms of rupturing our national security, our defense innovation efforts and potentially billions of dollars jettisoned with some of the old standing ways in which we keep doing this, the question that i struggle with is how do we best explain this to the american people? how do we talk about this complexity in human way to people in my district? i want to ask doctor schmidt and then secretarywork , when it comes to clearly articulating in a very understandable way how the threat will manifest and what people can understand and wrap their heads around in terms of the threats and opportunities i'd appreciate your perspective on that because i think people in my district understand the threats of transnational terrorism and the threats of conventional where warfare and that kind of way. it's visible and tangible to them but they struggle and i struggle and others struggle to understand what are we talking about in termsof the threat here ? >> i always start from the standpoint of america as a place of great freedom and our values and i am concerned that if we lose leadership in this area the information freedom we have, the free speech that we have, all the things that have made us a great country will be materially affected by those changes. and the way that would occur is ai is fundamentally software and software can be deployed to change the way you perceive the world as we discussed in our testimony so far . there are plenty of military comments bob should make but the interest in our society when the targeted opponent comes into our networks and information space and begins to scroll around, could lead to a real increase in distrust in our government. a lack of patriotism and a lack of belief in our country . >> i would have started exactly where chairman schmidt did. i technological competition is a values competition at its core. the way these applications will be used will reflect the governance system of the country that is pursuing them. so for our american citizens, all we have to do is say look at how thesetechnologies are being used in china . population surveillance. lack of privacy. lack of civil liberty. we do not want a world in which these values are reflected through technology and the infrastructures that support them and it is important for the united states, the greatest democracy in the world to apply these applications in a way thatare consistent with privacy, civil liberties and the law .depending on who you listen to either a mckenzie or a bcg, the winner of the ai competition will accrue a $13-$15 trillion economic advantage. they also say the same things for 5g. 5g might be's 5 to 7 billion, trillion, excuse me. so these technologies will affect our lives in ways that will make our citizens healthier, live longer and have better lives. be able to do their work better. be able to have just new ways of entertainment. this is a technology competition that is very important for us to win. >> thank you, go ahead. >> when i got my coupon inthe tech outline i was excited . oh my gosh, i'm saving money here then i started noticing my social interactions online and seeing these ads,. and i started wondering and learning more about algorithms and then started figuring certain things out that my digital footprints, my information, my pattern cannot only be monetized used against me so when it comes to what we're speaking of today and explaining to everyday constituents, everyday people who are trying to save money and trying to make their lives easier, that convenience used in the wrong way in the wrong hands can make us the most vulnerable people ever. that's why it's important. >> i'd like to build on that story if you want so let's keep working on this. mister chairman, i yield back . >> after johnson,recognized for five minutes .>> mister johnson from georgia. >> that user. >> i want to thank you mister chairman and also chairman lynch for holding this hearing. china has embarked on what the commission describes in its report as a quote, multipronged campaign of licit and illicit technology transfer. in effect the commission argues china is using american taxpayer dollars to fund its military and economic modernization. by some estimates, china's technology theft calls the united states between 300 billion and $600 billion a year . one of the several ways is seeking to gain a competitive edge is through venture-capital investments in us based ai startups. in response, the commission recommends in its report that congress will require investors from us competitors to disclose transactions in a broader set of sensitive technologies to the committee on foreign investment in the united states. mister louis, how broad is chinese investment in us based ai startups. >> the chinese are both company as well as regional, university organizations or are active throughout the entire united states. some of it is benign and some of it they want to make money. some of it is suspect but here's our challenge. the us remains fundamentally a voluntary series of regulations. we need to make sure that there is no longer voluntary. we're taking money from potential adversaries or competitors china and russia there needs to be disclosed. second, we have to make and we've been waiting for years now in the technology community for the list of the critical technologies that will be deemed critical for the united states. we still have not produced list. technology companies are guessing on whether or not something requires disclosure or not. we need to make it clear that these kinds of technologies like ai, like microelectronics, like quantum computing. any of these critical biotechnologies, any of these critical areas will be taking direct foreign investment or indirect investment from these nationstates need to be disclosed. most will be fine but a few ofthem may not be . we need to know and companies have a responsibility to disclose. >> thank you. what regulatory framework or disclosure transactions is currently in place for venture capital investments and how would requiring disclosure to these areas help ai technologies? >> it's hard to protect what you don't know. the first one is just bring their knowledge up . second is for those critical pieces of technology that we deemed as critical. we need to make sure that the state is empowered and have the skill set to review those technologies aggressively. we have this thing called a short form and a long form. there's a lot of people working the long form, the short form is a little bit easier. i think we each should take a look at the filing requirements particularly for venture capital and ensure people are well educated in regulatory review. the good news ismost tech companies and startups use very competent law firms . having the law firms be partners in this matter is going to be critical for us to be able to not only protect the technologies quite frankly protect those entrepreneurs technologies. what we can do is take some technologies that they put their hearts and lives in and had a competitor oversee and compete against them. >> would any of the other panelists like to comment? okay. in july 2020 report the center for security and emerging technology at georgetown found that out of 208 global chinese professionalassociations or cpas , more than half advertise on their website that they quote, exchange technical information, bring scientists to china or contributed to specific chinese talent plans. interestingly however the report also found that cpas that advertised the transfer of technology in chinese also are more likely to omit this information about that aspect of their missions from the english language versions of their websites. mister louis, why might the epa hide this information from english-speaking members . >> if you can answer briefly because the gentlemen's time has expired. >> it's difficult to read people's minds but i would say that they are clearly attempting to encourage american companies to put technologies overseas . and my biggest point is the relationship between technology transfer of us to china and china to the us is asymmetric. for americans to invest in chinese companies requires huge amounts of regulatory chinese regulatory hurdles you have to overcome whereas chinese efforts in the us have almost none. you've got to stick to that asymmetric and it doesn't help us in either direction. >> thank you, i yelled back. >> thank you mister johnson, miss houlihan is recognized for five minutes. >> i hope you all can hear me. i have a lot of questions and i'll try to read them quickly. my first questionsis for chairman schmidt . i appreciate the commissions inclusion and recommendations that help us find to build a full-time public service with digital experience and the success and failures will hinge on the government's ability to compete with the private sector and i'm enthusiastic about the digital service economy but i like to hear more about your process and other resources when it seems to get this undertaking off the ground and could you also talk us through your cost-benefit analysis if there is one of alternatives that might be less expensive like perhaps dramatically failing focus rotc programs such asthe one i participated in . >> perhaps commissioner clyburn would like to help me . it's a false equivalency to say that these somehow are related to the military and rotc activities. we strongly support the military and rotc activities. they are phenomenal and we should invest more in them especially with specialized digital skills. in addition the civilian workforce needs upgrading and the two are separate. the economics around the civilian workforce are pretty straightforward . the cost of hiring the people , the cost of paying them and so forth and so on is much less expensive if they're going to for your program which has been subsidized to some degree by the government and where they have a five-yearwork so the economics actually work . >> i guess i won't have to get back in touch with you in terms of the actual amount of shoring up a full academy but per student, the last figure i remember was a $50,000 per life cycle in terms of the actual expenditure per student but my answer to you is what's the cost of not doing anything? that cost is, cannot be quantified. is it a negative and a burden on our system and we must address this immediately. >> i completely agree with that and that's part of my follow-up question which is that i believe chairman schmidt pensioned something about the universities having offered to help get the essay up, could you explain how that might happen and how they might plan to do that and how the universities are able to be supportive of this initiative. >> man, just to follow up. 10 d in the report outlines what we believe are the recommended investments in all of our recommendations. our estimate for the digital service academy was a $40 million initial investment would get us on the way. we did not make a compilation on how much per year. but for example, the stem poor or digital core in the department of defense. we got 5 million in fy 22 and 5 million in fy 23 would allow you to essentially start the framework and the national reserve digital core managed through the office of management and budget about 16 million . now, these are -- >> i'm sorry to interrupt but i'm making sure that i ask probative question help get us where we need to bewhich is in support of these kinds of ideas . this last question is for mister clyburn and it has to do with the digital court we weretalking about . i'm interested in the idea of a reserve component and i was a reservist myself for many years and was never expressly called upon. i'm an engineer and i was wondering if you might think about how to imagine the opportunity for people to participate while coming in and out of the private sector . how do you addresspotential conflicts in that .>> let me say that the benefits are many. these individuals that come in, triage, help assist and augment at critical points in the cycle. if they are dedicated to a particular agency, they could make a world of difference and i struggle over the last part of your question . >> just potential conflicts if you're coming in and out of the private sector, maybe even defense industrial sector and you are coming in and out of the reservists into this digital core, what kind of conflicts could you foresee and how would be able to address them. >> doctor smith might be able to speak on that and on there would not be, there should be a vetting process. i believe there should be ways to address that at least initially. but in terms of the skills, the digital skills and opportunity to enhance that p3 partnership is worth some of the risk i believe moving forward. >> i apologize, i've run out of time so i will yieldback . >> your service and in the reserves is not called on because the gentle lady didn't know how to find you and why you were so valuable. so there's a demand side problem where the government doesn't know that you are availableand they can't take it vantage of your skills. we've got to get that fixed . >> thank you sir. >> i completely concur and that was a point to raise area very good. this is, this has been a great discussion. any members that have not asked the question that would like to be recognized? okay. hearing non- i just want to thank our witnesses for your testimony today. it's been invaluable. the report that you've produced is going to be both foundational and enduring i have no doubt as we confront the challenges and opportunities presented before us and obviously the power of ai and i know it would be very informative for members of the congress and staff as we draw upon your expertise and all the time and effort that went into these hearings and putting this report together. before i close out, i just want to tell the ranking member any thoughts or comments. >> thank you chairman lynch and thank you to the commissioners for their tremendous work. it's going to help guide us in the future for an active goal of government approach and i appreciate your focus on workforce challenge that is so urgent that lies in front of us. there is significant bipartisan interest in tackling this workforce issue with alacrity so thank you for the great work. we look forward to integrating many of your recommendations to the national defense authorization this year as we did in the last congress on a bipartisan basis and our colleagues on the subcommittee and full committee and thanks for coming in today and dedicating so muchtime . i yield back. >> well said. >> mister chairman, on behalf of the commission i would like to say once again it has been a privilege andan honor for the commissioners and commission to serve you . we remain ready and able and willing to work on this to make sure that we get to the great outcome for america. thank you so much. >> if you'd allow me. >> go ahead ranking member brockman. >> i'd like to thank you as well, it's an importantissue and it's one we cannot afford to fail on . i hope this committee as other hearings on this topic as time goes on . i appreciate all the work that went into the report and thank you forall coming to washington today . >> mister chairman, i want to add that we can provide the committees with classified briefings to give a fuller picture on how china and russia are approaching this competition and i feel like i'm probably as immersed in this as much as anyone and there are things in the intelligence record quite frankly surprised me very much. so we stand ready to come over and give thatbriefing to either the committee or members of the committee or however you would like to speak . >> very good. thank you secretary work for raisingthat point and we will take you up on . i look forward to a classified briefing so we get into some of those sensitive details but i on behalf of all my colleagues on both committees, i know mister lynch had to leave but we just want to thank you for your extraordinary contributions to this area of artificial intelligence and it will be a foundational document and instructed in helping us guide as we develop policies and legislation going forward to maximize the opportunities of ai. thank you all verymuch . stay in touch. with that if members have any questions, this hearing is adjourned. iq. >>. [inaudible] >>. [inaudible] >>. [inaudible] >> coming up, president -the vice president harris will be in the rose garden to talk about the latest pandemic relief measure, the american rescue plan to nearly $2 trillion plan signed into law by the president. live coverage from the rose garden set for 2:30eastern on our companion network , c-span. book tv on c-span2 has top nonfiction books and authors every weekend. sunday night at 9 pm eastern on "after words", claremont review of books editor charles kessler talks about his book crisis of the two constitutions: the rise, decline and recovery of american greatness. interviewed by author and george mason university law professor ilia sullivan and at 10 , author journalist and biographer walter isaacson look at the developer of the crispermethod for genome editing . in his book the code breaker, gene editing and the future of the human race. and at 1105 and her book the daughters of combining journalist gail lemmon reports on a group of kurdish warriors who are fighting and winning againstisis in syria . what book tv this weekend on c-span2. >> more than 2000 students entered the documentary competition and told us the issues they wanted the president and congress to address. here are our students cam winners. middle school a greater carson college, a homeschooler from austin college. with a documentary about the chinese authorities taught in us universities. and you can from winston churchill high school on the comcast cable system. there documentary about education and the first prize i school central from james high school in james oklahoma on the cable system for there documentary about online piracy and copy protection. first prize goes to sophia borja from ngv you in canoga park california on the spectrum cable system for there documentary about us foreign policy and the $5000 grand prize winner is po from williamsville south high school on the spectrum cable system. >> we wanted to congratulate you because you're 2021 grand prize winner. >> really? >> really. >> congratulations. >> thank you guys so much. >> feel boyd one grand applies for a documentary about political division. >> the american experiment is one of successes and failures and in order to get out of this pandemic toachieve racial justice , to try to reunite a fracturednation we need to hear thetruth . even when , especially when the path ahead will be long and full of struggle. once we come to expect the truth even hard truth we the people can place ourtrust in a better future . >> thanks to all the students who are dissipated in the studentcan documentary . the tops are on c-span starting april 1 and you can watch all the winning documentaries anytime online at studentcam.org. >> you are watching c-span2, your unfiltered view of government. c-span2 was created by america's cable television companies and brought to you today by these television companies who provide c-span2 reviewers as a public service . and now foreign afir

Related Keywords

Georgia ,United States ,Taiwan ,Afghanistan ,Hong Kong ,Iran ,Beijing ,China ,Boston ,Massachusetts ,California ,Syria ,Togo ,Canada ,Russia ,New Zealand ,Iraq ,North Korea ,Americans ,America ,Chinese ,American ,Gilman Louie ,Steven Lynch ,Mister Kim ,Carnegie Mellon ,Eric Schmidt ,States Mister Louis ,Ilia Sullivan ,Mister Bloomington ,Goldwater Nichols ,Mister Johnson ,Mister Higgins ,Mister Louis ,Michael Mccall ,