The "Jade" In Jade Helm 15 is an A.I. Software Program

anyone ever see the movie "Eagle Eye"? It's a scary scenario.

a reply to: elliotmtl

In fairness to the OP originally the thread was based on the video and the possible application of the data collection into a more robust computing element that created the AI conspiracy accusation. The Raytheon paper was added by another member and is clearly about coordinating the simulation for an exercise in 2007.
The possibility of AI combined with NSA data collection creates just enough of a feasibility cause heads to explode. The reporter isn't credible nor did she provide any real evidence, just supposition so it is just conspiracy.

originally posted by: howmuch4another
a reply to: elliotmtl

In fairness to the OP originally the thread was based on the video and the possible application of the data collection into a more robust computing element that created the AI conspiracy accusation. The Raytheon paper was added by another member and is clearly about coordinating the simulation for an exercise in 2007.
The possibility of AI combined with NSA data collection creates just enough of a feasibility cause heads to explode. The reporter isn't credible nor did she provide any real evidence, just supposition so it is just conspiracy.

A fair point, and I'll take it. I hope not too many heads explode... and if indeed this is only worth the supposition, I'll accept that. Not many of us have the power to actually prove most of what is written about on this site, which is unfortunate, but we do what we can.

Personally, it just rings true enough to me to consider it. She may not be credible to a T, but it makes a lot of sense to me, and we'll get to find out soon enough. Until then, study continues and it's "out there" for people to think about.

a reply to: Aqualung2012

And it is not a computer program. They have used it since then for some exercises. But it's still not an AI. It's a network, like say SETI@Home. The ship computers do most of the work on calculating the missile trajectory and sends it back to the control center.

The computers tied to the aircraft handle that data and send it back. The computers at the control center crunch the numbers and decide what hits and what misses.

a reply to: Aqualung2012

This was the original JADE mission planner. They plugged in available units, equipment and munitions, then the target and defenses and the computer was able to put together a strike package in a couple hours. Again it was a network between units involved. It was a fancy computer, but not an AI.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Never mind.

You were gonna say "Jade Helm starts in August and ends in September" for the millionth time?

a reply to: Zaphod58

Again, the known use of JADE software in the past as an "on-the-fly resource allocation/strike planner" may not have been A.I. itself, as you've shown. I agree to that extent.

What is being suggested is that this *current* version is indeed A.I., and is not simply for military use. It's to say that they took the results from a successful experiment and have applied them to a larger objective. Where originally it was a system of calculating battle stratagem based on data input including weapons inventory and location (basically just a fancy calculator,) NOW it is a *part* of a larger system (ad nauseum) that's going to run the show for Jade Helm 15.

In fewer words: you've pointed out that the PDF outlines the past use (and known success) of JADE. What this aims to do is point out that JADE has been upgraded and applied to the larger "domain" of information gathered by NSA and others, and that this A.I version will be set for a "test" during JADE HELM 15... (which is typical of military and industry: is something works, then use it. Make it work even better.) It just doesn't add up that it would be so successful then and just stopped afterward.

a reply to: Aqualung2012

It WASN'T stopped after. It's just not a major news story. It's been used a number of times, especially for things like Aegis upgrade tests.

If it was upgraded to an AI it wouldn't be JADE II, it would be JADE III or IV.

You know everyone keeps making a big deal about the name, but not everything is an acronym, or has hidden meaning. You know how they come up with exercise and operation names? They go to a computer that picks two random words and puts them together. That way they don't give anything away by the name.

a reply to: Granite

No, I was pointing out that the pdf linked wasn't an AI, and decided not to beat my head against the wall and did anyway.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So in your opinion, if paired with an A.I, platform and fed the massive amount of data gathered by the NSA, would the JADE II software be a good fit for what is being said here? Could it be used in the method suggested?

Further, isn't it at all interesting to you that Jade Helm is called Jade Helm in light of this scenario? Considering it's known application... it doesn't seem like there could be something to this, in your opinion? I realize it is an acronym, but I also know they don't *really* try to hide this stuff... For instance, Jade Helm 15 begins the same day as the Cremation of Care Ritual...

(I am by no means trying to uselessly bicker, I do value your opinions, and your facts of course... I understand but I would take it to the next level, and I'm curious what you think.)

a reply to: Aqualung2012

From a military standpoint if real, it's genius.

An AI able to process data in real time from around the world 24/7 to fight a world war for you.

No single human intelligence could take a worldwide theater and know every unit movement, drone, tank, plane, submarine, ship.....

Question is though, once it's started are the operators able to interfere with it's mission?

a reply to: Aqualung2012

I don't think the name has anything to do with JADE or JADE II. Exercise names are usually random. Red Flag, Green Flag, Sentry Aloha, Cope Tiger...

You couldn't tell anything about those exercises just based on the names, and this one isn't different.

Jade isn't an AI so it wouldn't be tied to the NSA. They have their own computer systems and don't need a military planning/simulation system.

a reply to: Zaphod58

JADE (Joint Assistant for Deployment and Execution) is a knowledge-based, mixed-initiative system that supports force deployment planning and management. JADE uses case-based and generative planning methods to support the development of large-scale, complex deployment plans in minimal time. JADE incorporates the technology of three tools: Prodigy-Analogy (a combined case-based and generative planner developed by Carnegie Mellon University); ForMAT (a Force Management and Analysis Tool that supports case-based force deployment planning developed by BBN Technologies); and PARKA (a highly-indexed knowledge based management system developed by the University of Maryland). With JADE, a military planner can build a preliminary force deployment plan, including the Time Phased Force Deployment Data (TPFDD) in less than one hour. This speed in plan construction is possible because JADE supports the rapid retrieval and reuse of previous plan elements for use in the development of new plans. In addition, JADE employs an easy to use map-oriented drag and drop interface where force modules (FMs) from previous plans (cases) whose force capabilities and composition match the requirements of the current situation can be dragged from the case library and dropped onto a geographic destination. Plan modification and/or adaptation is supported through remindings, e.g., each time that a force module is created or is copied into a plan (TPFDD) the user is automatically reminded of the need for geographical changes.

I only included that to point out that JADE (the software) does indeed mean something... "Joint Assistant for Development and Execution," which we all know. But to combine "Jade" and "Helm"... that is not "Operation Paperclip," not to me.... there has got to be something to that.

Also, your typical code-named secret mission generally doesn't include an ominous slogan like "Mastering the Human Domain," which, oddly enough is exactly the kind of language employed by previous JADE exercises.

The correlation is simply too much to just chalk up to chance. I'm sure I sound like a hard headed idiot to you and others reading this... but nothing else comes close to explaining any of this. Too many loose ends are tied up if you apply this to Jade Helm 15. Please forgive me, but I'm convinced.

Glad the OP had time to do a proper thread on it.

I wrote something up real quick through very sleepy vision only to come back to it later and find the usual tools dismantling it with a couple exceptions.

Kudos.

a reply to: Aqualung2012

Which was the plug and plan system I talked about a couple posts ago.

The human domain slogan was explained multiple times. It's using psychological tools to plan sabotage missions. It has nothing to do with an AI.

But you're determined that this is a AI, so fine, it's an AI and it's going to run everything.

originally posted by: Aqualung2012
a reply to: Thorneblood

No, it means literally that the President of the United States (and the other participating military powers of the world) will no longer be recognized as "Commander in Chief." The computer will be responsible for who lives and who dies, it is capable of determining INTENT of officers/enemies/civilians.... intent. It is not under the influence of emotions, regret or any of the like... it is designed to be the most effective and efficient killer it can be.

It's already got everything it needs. This is why the "meta-data" argument is BS.... meta-data is useless in a system like this: it absolutely needs all of our voice and text messages because it is literally MAPPING our minds. It knows our behavior and can predict intent. Bigger than huge, like I say.

The kicker to this is that any system based on predictive modeling (which such a mind mapping based on such limited information would be) is that all it can do is predict a % likelihood. The decision makers would then need to decide how many innocents they're willing to execute in order to eliminate the percentage of "bad guys" they want to eliminate.

That might mean you can eliminate 20% of the "bads" and only murder 0.5% of "goods" along the way. You lose progressively more goods as you get closer to eliminating all bads.

From the PDF:

Beyond Reactive Planning:
Self Adaptive Software and Self Modeling Software in Predictive Deliberation Management
The purpose of this paper is to examine an approach to planning which extends beyond the traditional reactive planning state space. We present the following hypothesis: predictive deliberation management using self adapting and se lf modeling software will be required to provide mission planning adjustments after the start of a mission. Self adaptive software evaluates its own behavior and changes behavior when the evaluation indicates that it is not accomplishing what the software is intended to do, or when better functionality or performance is possible1.
Self modeling systems construct their own abstractions as a basis of computational intelligence2. In order to provide a proper process context for the evolution of software toward this level of autonomy, and in alignment with the proposed planning maturity models3, we put forth a concept of a NCW C2 Software Maturity Model. This new C2 software maturity model will take software beyond the service oriented paradigm into a new era of software designing its own replacements or modifications in order to satisfy new command and control requirements.

Sounds pretty intelligent to me.... I don't know how to define "A.I." but that's pretty impressive.


Also from the PDF

Performance Measures for Edge Organizations: A Preliminary Report Taking an information-processing view of organizations, we address th e need for building a robust set of performance measures for Edge Organizations (E Os). Alberts and Hayes in Power to the Edge: Command, Control in the Information Age conceptualized EOs as information-intensive entities whose performance is directly related to their ability for agile information processing. We ask the question, how can we measure the information-processing capacities of EOs? To this end, in this research-in-progress paper, we examine (1) the technical dimension of information flows, (2) the human-dimension of information flows, and (3) the socio-technical dimensions of info rmation flows. The technical dimension represents movement of information between two machine nodes and can be informed by drawing on performance measures for telecommunications network theory. The social dimension represents the movement of information between two human nodes for which we examine the literature on social networks for performance measures. Finally, the so cio-technical dimension re presents movement of information between human and technical nodes or vice versa.
To develop measures for these information flows we must not only extend, and customize, the performance measures from telecommunications networks and social networks, but also draw on measures in the disciplines of decision sciences, information sciences, and organizational science, among others.

PDF:

Disruptive Effects of Net-Centri city on Command and Control
This paper explores the potential for net-centric operating environments to disrupt traditional practices in command and control. We conclude that at least two major disruptive effects are likely: information non- attribution and control decentralization. Information non-attribution reverses the assumption that commands are issued from an individua l entity to an individual entity. In net-centric worlds, orders will be issued to a resource pool, and information will be gleaned from an infosphere. The military command hierarchy must therefore get accustomed to issuing orders to “nobody in particular,” and commanders will lack an individual subordinate with whom to attribute the responsibility. Conversely, they must accept information from the infosphere without the trust inherited from known reliable providers. Control decentralization is a tendency for decision-making to migrate to the “edges” of the organization, where the most direct sensors and effectors are physically located. Net-centricity directly empowers those closest to the action by giving them access to information of quality and quantity that is potentially equal to or better than that available in command centers. Together, these effects of net-centricity suggest disruptive changes in command and control practices that must be modeled and explored as the vision of net-centric command and control becomes a reality.

Sounds like at the time of this work, the tables were already turning to the favor of the machine. A lot of this is talking about how humans are going to have to get used to working around the computer, not the other way around.

Also:

Supporting Adaptive C2 Structures in Time-critical Environments
As technological advances allow automation of many operations, human operators supervise systems with increasing breadth of scope. In these complex environments, decisions regarding resource assignment to tasks, goal prioritization and coordination strategies during unexpected events become unwieldy as the problem spaces grow. In this paper, we describe the development of technology to support teams of operators controlling teams of unmanned vehicles (UVs) in their global resource planning and re-planning. These teams include a several coordinating Littoral Combat Ships, a mixture of autonomous vehicle types, typically with a range of differing capabilities, and management by multiple human operators attempting to achieve several high-level goals. Using the results of a Cognitive Work Analysis, we extend our work in organization design and analysis to give real-time support to the operators.

Yes, it seems at the writing of these papers, humans are still operating these UVs. Not quite A.I. just yet, but damn if it's not getting close.

"Person of interest" tv show just got real

originally posted by: Zaphod58
...it's an AI and it's going to run everything.

Goddammit, we're doomed.