Lethal Minds Volume 15
Lethal Minds Volume 15
Volume 15, Edition 1 01SEPTEMBER2023
LETHAL MINDS JOURNAL
Lethal Minds Volume 15
Volume 15, Edition 1 01SEPTEMBER2023
Letter from the Editor
I write you this month from Guam, USA, in the Marianas Island Chain, poised at the edge of the Marianas Trench, the deepest part of the world’s oceans. I’m here with fellow writer, LMJ editor, runner, and retired Marine Raider, John Dailey, courtesy of Task Force Dagger, a Special Operations Forces-focused 501(c)3 organization.
Task Force Dagger and the National Park Service Submerged Resources Center work together, giving vets a chance to dive in support of National Park Service efforts. In this case, John and I are diving off the 1944 invasion beaches at Asan and Agat, looking for artifacts from World War Two and the fight in which the 3rd Marine Division, the 1st Provisional Marine Brigade, and the 77th Infantry Division came ashore to dislodge the Japanese 29th Division from the 212 square miles of Guam. Almost every member of the Japanese force died in the battle, with the last surviving Japanese NCO emerging from the jungle twenty-eight years later in 1972, the year I was born. Say what you will, but that is mission focus. Mission focus matters.
A lot of us wanted a mission, it’s why we signed up to serve in the first place. And the truth is, a lot of us still need one long after our service ends. That’s a motivation that can be channeled to good and bad effect. You get to make that choice, but there are countless organizations out there hoping to help you make it good. Every month I mention that you are welcome to join us here at Lethal Minds, and every month more of you do. But not everyone wants to write or draw or paint. Some folks want to serve or shoot or roll on the mat or any number of things to which Patrol Base Abbate is a conduit. If you’re looking for something else, PB Abbate will make it happen. I belong to the PB Abbate Book Club, run at an exceptional level by Michael Jerome Plunkett of LMJ’s very own Lit of War Podcast.
The only bar to entry for PB Abbate is a DD214. You either need to have one or be eligible for one someday. It’s pretty much the same as contributing to Lethal Minds. You earned your place the day you raised your hand.
Fire for Effect.
Russell Worth Parker
Editor in Chief – Lethal Minds Journal
Submissions are open at lethalmindsjournal@gmail.com.
Dedicated to those who serve, those who have served, and those who paid the final price for their country.
Sponsors:
This month’s Journal is brought you to by Fieldseats.com and the Scuttlebutt Podcast.
Fieldseats.com is an e-commerce federally licensed firearms dealer. They provide virtual reviews on brand new firearms, optics, and gear where at the end of the review they give away the item being reviewed to an attendee!
Currently, they’ve got Reviews up ranging from $20 for a brand new Smith & Wesson M&P Shield 2.0 to $60 for a new Trijicon ACOG with RMR. Each review has limited seating so your chances of winning the giveaway are that much higher!
Check out fieldseats.com to purchase your Reviews and enter to win the item being reviewed and use code “LETHALMINDS” to get 10% off your order. Be sure to also check out their Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube @field_seats for updates on products and other tips and info!
Use code “LETHALMINDS” to receive 10% off your entire purchase at fieldseats.com! Terms and conditions apply.
Be sure to also check out their Instagram and Twitter @field_seats
The Scuttlebutt Podcast is a free podcast and newsletter covering how to help you succeed outside of military service.
Recent episodes include:
23. Rich Jordan on Empowering A Team
41. How to use Chapter 31 Veterans Readiness and Employment benefits with Max
51. What If My Passion Has Nothing To Do With What I'm Doing Now with Bill Kieffer
In This Issue
The Written Word
Hi Ho Silver!
You Good?
Poetry and Art
Hawai’i in the Seventies
The Warrior
Parcels and Tin
Opinion
Book Review: Blood, Sweat, and Pixels
Gen Z Marine's Book on Military Recruiting Crisis
World Today
A Lost Masterpiece and Missed Opportunity
Beyond Moore's Law: Guiding the Future of Tech
Conflating the Mass and Velocity of Ideas
The Written Word
Fiction and Nonfiction written by servicemen and veterans.
Hi Ho Silver! - Ross Pederson
Ross is a Special Forces Detachment Commander in the National Guard. In his other life, he leads a technology company in Upstate, NY where he lives with his wife. Find him on Twitter @RossPedersen
We were out on our own, on the edge of the Sahara, hours away from the nearest Americans. We did, however, have a handful of Europeans with us—two handfuls, actually. Five Germans and six Belgians lived with us on our small desert FOB. My ODA got along famously, but as would happen with any group of people so secluded for so long, some tension developed.
It started small, a joke here, a look there, but escalated to a point where a couple of the guys were secluding themselves from the team and only spending time with our NATO partners. Small problems spiral into bigger ones, so we couldn’t let that kind of thing go unchecked. But what was a brand-new Team Leader with a brand-new team to do?
I called in the brain trust—the only two guys on the team who hadn’t just graduated the course. Both former Seventh Groupers, one was a newly minted SFC, the other a very salty SSG.
“Guys, shit’s gotten weird around here and I’ve had enough of it. I’ve been thinking about it all week and have an idea, but it’s probably a bad one. This is one of those times when I need my senior NCOs to say ‘sir, that’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.’”
That got their attention.
A few weeks earlier, at one of our team syncs, I had made a joke about CPT Sobel from Band of Brothers, being my leadership icon. It was funny because I err in the other direction. I am too familiar with my team, too nice at times. I told them one day I would go “full Sobel” and they’d come to appreciate the virtues of his leadership style more.
“What if that day is today?” I asked my senior NCOs. “What if I just flip a switch and act like CPT Sobel, shake things up a little. Is that crazy?”
“Honestly, sir, I hate to say it, but why not? Our men need to get out of this rut. They need a shock to the system.”
It was agreed, after lunch I would transform into the marionet my men needed to hate. After lunch was important though, it was the key to selling the whole bit. I went to Dan, our cook, and asked what he was preparing.
“Chicken and rice, but I haven’t started yet. Why do you ask?”
“Do we have any spaghetti lying around?”
“A ton. But again, why?”
“Okay. Can you make spaghetti instead today? And make a lot of it. I want everyone to get seconds.”
“Oooookay sir. Will do.”
The trap was set.
When lunchtime rolled around, I put on my most happy, cheerful face and encouraged everyone to get their fill—everyone except me. When the last plate was cleared, I disappeared into the office and sent out a message to the group chat.
“Everyone outside the OPCEN in 15 minutes. PTs.”
Exactly 14 and a half minutes later I was standing outside watching the seconds count down on my Timex, the same $8 watch I wore through Ranger School, Selection, and the Q-Course. Precisely at the 15-minute mark, I told everyone to form up in two lines and follow me. I took off at a six-minute pace for the five-mile loop around the exterior of the camp. The hard packed sand reflected the sun’s heat, turning the vast expanse of nothingness into a 112-degree oven.
Five minutes in, I looked behind me and saw that only two of my guys had kept up. The rest were strung out in ones and twos, everyone else was struggling some distance back. I stopped on a dime and ran to the furthest back, my lone SFC.
“What the fuck do you think you’re doing?” I screamed into his face. “You expect to manage this team and you can’t even keep up during PT?”
He looked at me with angry, knowing eyes. This was all a part of the plan; he couldn’t be made to look in on it. Still, I am sure he didn’t enjoy the humiliation.
I raced away, running up the line of stragglers.
“And you all? You’re going to just let your Team Sergeant fall out? Do you even care? Is this even a team? Was no one going to check on him? Or were you just racing back so you could go spend time with your real teams? Pathetic. And to think you call yourselves Green Berets!”
No replies came immediately, just heavy panting and some dry heaving. Then, my Delta came rushing back to the Team Sergeant to check on him.
“Do not help that man!”
This was getting fun. I screamed other lines from the famous scene while I watched confused looks wash over the faces of my men. I even got a couple “hi ho silver!”s in.
Then, something strange happened. As if we were all back in basic training, they slowed down, formed up into two ranks, and, I shit you not, started calling cadences. My intensely personal berating and exhortations to go faster were completely ignored. The only interruptions in the slow, steady cadence happened when someone had to fall out to gift his spaghetti to our desert mother.
I was astonished that, despite the obvious fact that this was an intensely manufactured farce, it was having the desired effect. They were defiantly demonstrating that they could work as a team and beat me at my own ridiculous game. I had trouble keeping a smile from overtaking my face.
When we got back to the OPCEN, I called everyone in.
“Obviously that was all a bit, but at the same time, it was serious. Things have been getting weird and we cannot be successful if we are not a team. I don’t care what is going on, it just needs to be fixed. For the rest of this deployment, this team comes before everything else. We can disagree internally, but we will present a united front to the rest of the world. Am I clear?”
And evidently, I was because, strangely enough, that was the end of that for the rest of the trip.
Maybe CPT Sobel knew something after all.
You Good? - Benjamin Van Horrick
Benjamin Van Horrick is a Marine stationed in Okinawa, Japan.
Lansing, MI
September 2000
“You good?”
My teammates showed genuine concern for my well-being.
Teenage boys are not known for their concern for one another.
I know now something is wrong.
Teammates walked towards me as my world regained color. An ocean of black plotted out my vision on my head and made contact with the running back.
Just a moment before that, the opposing quarterback loafed a pass to an unwitting running back. I prayed for these moments. I time my hit, leading with my helmet, knocking the poor receiver to the group. Our bodies crumple to the ground as our heads spin.
The box score recorded a tackle for loss.
Status of my brain - results unknown; failed Geometry pop quiz the following day
Hiram, Ohio, November 2006
“You good?”
This was not a question. It is a joke. The athletic trainer giggles as I stagger to the sidelines.
Moments before I ran 50 yards at a full sprint and slammed my body into a kickoff returner.
In civil society, my actions would draw felony charges. On the gridiron, the act did not even draw a flag.
Later that night I purchased my first legal drink. My teammates toasted my birthday and the hit.
The alcohol, the concussion, and maybe the dehydration left me with a blank look as the bar room banter rang in my ears.
“So, you good?”
I am good.
The box score reflected a tackle.
Status of my brain - unknown
Camp Hansen, Marjah, Afghanistan - November 2010
“You good?”
This was not a question or a joke. It was a prayer.
Bauer’s flat affect and slow speech gave me the answer. Days before Bauer’s vehicle struck an IED, and the explosion left him dazed and stunned. The new MRAP did little for Bauer. The training I devised as his former platoon commander - each week, we had reviewed IED characteristics, visual clues, and counteractions - did even less.
Standing in Marjah’s mid-morning chill, Bauer looked at four more months in Helmand, driving its unimproved paths Each day he’d have to get behind the wheel wondering if his luck would run out again.
“So, you good?”
“I am good sir. “
Months later in Camp Lejeune, I stood in the formation as Bauer received his Purple Heart.
Box Score: One IED strike - One Purple Heart.
Status of Bauer’s Brain - Scrambled, fragmented, splintere
Camp Lejeune, NC - May 2015
“You good?”
This was not a question, a joke, or a prayer. It was a plea.
Chester enters my office as his soul begins flowing out of his eyes. His world is crumbling. The machine gunner is now a Marine in Care. Chester is no longer laying down suppressive fire. Now, he attempts to suppress the flood of negative emotions originating from his once functional, now fragmented, mind and body. Following the IED strike, Chester’s wounds remained invisible. His bell rung, his body rocked, and his world altered.
Once my office door closed, Chester’s trapezius muscles quaked and quivered as his tear ducts opened.
They say an army moves on its stomach. Machine guns move on Marines’ traps and lats.
GWOT infantry battalions like Chester’s were full of former high school linebackers and defensive ends who found work as machine gunners. 5’10, 200 pounds or more, average intelligence, cock strong, self-assured, risk-averse, and tougher than you. They were charged with laying down suppressive fire and, if required, laying down their life for their brothers.
I hugged Chester. In that moment it was the only appropriate and possible response.
The IED strike did not leave fragments in Chester. But it, and the implementation of war, did fragment Chester’s mind, and his family, in turn.
“So you good?”
“I am good sir. “
Box Score - Chester v. The Day - A Push
Status of Chester’s Brain - Fucked.
Okinawa, Japan, November 2022
“You good?”
This is not a question, a joke, a prayer, or a plea. This is a code.
My wife asks me if I am good when my fly is down.
I look down and see my zipper remains in the down position. I then zip my fly up.
Forgetting to zip up my fly occurs more than I care to admit.
So does forgetting where I park, forgetting an item on my shopping list, or forgetting to pack an undershirt for work.
I do not know if these are a direct result of my concussions, but I cannot rule it out.
Last fall, I completed a to-do list one item long: I elected to donate my brain to advance the study of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy.
Servicemembers who suffered Traumatic Brain Injuries were brought home after the war.
The blast radius now envelops their families. They are not good.
Forgetting to zip up your fly is a small inconvenience compared to the mood swings, fits of anger, crying, shouting, and impulsive behavior that places the loved ones of the afflicted in the middle of a war zone with no warning.
I pray my brain will uncover clues to treat those in the future with TBIs.
Box Score: One Brain Donated
Status of my Brain - To be known one day
I’m good.
Poetry and Art
Poetry and art from the warfighting community.
Hawai’i in the Seventies - Jeremiah Granden
Jeremiah Granden has placed work in literary magazines, screenwriting festivals and contests, crime noir publications, comedy websites, and other venues. He has a BA in English with a Theater Minor from Missouri State, as well as a Master's Degree in International Affairs from Georgia Tech (where he also worked as a researcher and program manager for an international security think tank). He is a Marine Corps veteran.
They like to drown servicemen out there,
The long, flat girls with their straight, Bundy-victim hair.
They point to risky rocks and churning blue. Toilet Bowl. Witches’ Brew.
Hanauma Bay drafted to replace the Easter Offensive. The war’s Pacific coda.
“Swim out there, man. My little brother and his friends do it all the time.”
Their ruse is innocent. Local weed, local boys, and world political economy put them up to it.
Author’s Note: This work was inspired by Maxine Hong Kingston’s collection of essays, Hawai’I One Summer. It served as my Grecian urn.
The Warrior - Ivan Ingraham
Ivan F. Ingraham is a freelance writer and veteran. He served for 24 years in the U.S. Marine
Corps as a Special Operations Officer. This is his first submission to Lethal Minds Journal.
Was I not?
Brave.
Fearless.
Dependable.
Reckless.
I don't remember being
scared
But, I'm sure I was;
weren't we all?
Did I not?
Lead.
Act.
Do.
I tried to be like my heroes.
People didn't like me.
So, I tried harder.
Did I measure up?
Am I not?
Brave.
Scared.
A leader of Marines.
A killer?
But, who am I really?
The Greatest Generation is past and
we are not remembered.
We, too, shouldered the load of a Nation.
And we did it
for twenty years.
Alone.
And now I am:
Aimless.
Sad.
Tired.
Broken.
And for what?
I'd do it all over again
to be what others
only dreamed of.
And, to get it, they wouldn't trade places with me.
I'll take who I am, accept him,
embrace him.
And become what's next.
Haven't I earned it?
Haven't I.
Parcels of Tin and Cloth - Tales from the Gridsquare
Parcels of tin and cloth
Trinkets of earned and given pride
Pinned close to the heart
Traditional rites handed down through time
Colors and patterns known only to the tribe
Devices delicately placed as a message
Colorful ribbons lined up in a row
Dangling medallions of silver and bronze
Rights of passage displayed by badges
Stripes, chevrons, leafs, and bars
An Eagle and the occasional stars
Earned or not, define the members of the tribe
Many wear the mark of parcels of tin and cloth
Torn flesh and bloodied skin mark the moment
Of rites brought to passage
There are those who display them with pride
Earned or not, it wasn’t up to them to decide
Some are robbed their parcels of tin and cloth
Denied for virtue alone or predisposed
Others wear them in apathetic tradition
For the sake of conforming necessity
And a few simply because they survived
Held in shame in the place of better men
Forever they are all beholden
To these parcels of tin and cloth
Opinion
Op Eds and general thought pieces meant to spark conversation and introspection.
Book Review: Blood, Sweat, and Pixels - The Box Wizard
In his work Blood, Sweat, and Pixels, Jason Schreier presents a peek into the modern video game industry that is worth an estimated at $595 billion. Schreier is a journalist who has spent the last 13 years reporting on the industry and written for Wired, Kotaku, and G4TV. He has become a mainstay in video game reporting. Through research and hundreds of interviews over a two year period, Shreier has created a fascinating and compelling look into an industry of which many of us are consumers.
While there doesn’t seem to be a central theme running through the book, you do get the inside story of the trials and tribulations of the development of ten different video games many of us have played. Each chapter focuses on a single game. These games cover massive financial and critical successes such as The Witcher 3 and Diablo III, to smaller niche hits like Stardew Valley and Shovel Knight. Industry giants like Electronic Arts and small, determined developers are profiled as they spent years creating what they hoped would be a hit.
While the technical aspects of game development, or how a story for a game is created, were interesting, the most fascinating part that I found was the people that made these games and the different approaches that leadership can use to focus talent to create success. Leaders within video game projects are as vastly different as those in the military. They have their own methods to inspire, drive, and focus the talent that is given to them to achieve an objective. Some methods are inspiring, others are morale-crushing and you get narratives of both throughout. Each chapter is different and that’s what made this book hard to put down.
Take for example, the creation of Uncharted 4. It had been in development for years under one project lead and abruptly, leadership was changed to the two individuals who had just completed The Last of Us. To meet the deadline for release, these two had to make very fast and hard choices. These choices included removing certain aspects and features of the game, and even the story. The new leads hacked features and ordered a complete overhaul of the storyline, all while continuing the project’s development and keeping 200 employees focused and moving toward the end goal. This led to what the game industry calls crunch. While not truly defined, crunch is a game industry term that attempts to describe the psychological mindset of employees as a deadline draws near. Employees may find themselves working 16-18 hour days with no end in sight, putting in maximum effort without knowing when it will end. They obviously succeeded, but the crunch of completing the game led to a turnover of over 70% of the people who worked on the game due to burnout.
These are things all leaders have dealt with. Mass turnovers due to the vicious PCS/ETS cycle we find ourselves in. A sudden change in direction based on new priorities from higher-ups. What staff officer or NCO hasn’t found themselves sitting around during planning because another staff section had not completed a crucial step? We have all felt the unending crunch that ensues when the mission must be completed at the cost of body and mind.
I think it is important to always find and consume new perspectives and this book is a great one. You can put aside the video game piece if you want while reading and just focus on the people and leaders themselves and still come out the better for it. I recommend this for both junior and senior leaders as it is a relatively fast, interesting read, and provides insight in a way that most typical military-associated reading does not.
Gen Z Marine's Book on Military Recruiting Crisis - Matthew Weiss
Second Lieutenant Matthew Weiss an Intelligence Officer in the United States Marine Corps. Previously, he worked in mergers and acquisitions at a cutting-edge defense technology company. He holds a BS and an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. Most importantly, he is a member of Generation Z who cares deeply about solving this issue of service and this is an excerpt from his book at www.unclesambook.org. His views do not necessarily represent that of the Department of Defense.
What happens if we have a war and nobody shows up to fight? Military recruitment in the United States is at an all-time low. In fact, one of the few things Democrats and Republicans can agree about is that our armed forces are facing a manpower crisis. The entire notion of the “all-volunteer” force that has kept us safe for 50 years is in peril. Last year, the Army missed its recruitment goal by roughly 15,000 soldiers. In a world with increasingly numerous and powerful threats, this presents grave national security concerns. In addition, it reveals something deeper about America’s youth and where we are as a society today.
Simply put, Generation Z is not interested in joining the military. Zoomers, those born between 1997 and 2012, have grown up in extremely tumultuous times. While we’ve had access to technology our whole lives, we’ve witnessed the Great Financial Crisis, two forever wars in the Middle East, school shootings, partisan politics, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Young people in my age cohort are described as far more pragmatic and anxious than our older millennial cousins.
To further consider the military recruiting issue with Generation Z, I first looked at the basics of our generation. Who are we? What fundamentally makes us tick? I found that we’re struggling to find meaning in our everyday work, yet we want to differentiate ourselves through competition. We’re not the “everyone gets a trophy generation”, rather we are the “I want more likes than my peers so I stand out” generation.
Next, I looked at specific ways the military can change to be more in line with what Z expects for a modern workplace. Gone are the days of just doing things because that’s the way they’ve always been done. We innovate in everything and we expect our employers to do the same. Reskilling programs, performance-based pay, and remote work are all relatively new models of task achievement that Z is beginning to demand. Unfortunately, the military has not been quick to catch on to this.
After that, I analyzed how American society at large impacts Gen Z recruitment. To the extent they can be ascertained, shifting societal truths are currents, just like the ocean currents, and they exist whether we like them or not. The DoD would be smart to adapt to them rather than complain and try to change them. It’s a fallacy and a cop-out to claim that only 23% of American youth are qualified to serve. This oft-repeated line by defense leaders is wrong and is a cover-up. Instead, as an organization we must adapt to work with what we have. Drug use, crime, education level, and obesity are the main barriers to young persons being admitted into the service. The DoD must recognize that Z is markedly different in each of these categories. Rather than complaining about our youth, it would be wiser for DoD to work towards making the military a place more appealing to us.
We should promote a force that lets political policy issues be discussed without allowing party-line partisanship to occur. Rethinking views on marijuana use and bringing its treatment in line with alcohol use would also be a boon to recruiting. Finally, prioritizing mental health on par or more than physical health with Zoomers would also be effective in beginning to shift recruiting trends. I’m not calling for a total relaxing of standards, but I am calling for a reanalysis of what the right standards to uphold are.
Finally, I looked at ways that the military, through its new Gen Z cohort, can change larger society over time: instances where we can heal the environment, promote the advancement of the underrepresented, and prepare our country for the challenges ahead.
What I found in this study and in my short time in uniform so far is that many of the traditionally amazing aspects of military service still ring as true today as in the past. However, other aspects are in great need of a makeover. What stands above all else is the military’s unique ability to be the greatest physical social network for a generation struggling with fake, digital connections. The human bonds formed between brothers and sisters in the services are stronger than any other. That shared experience is what must be emphasized to better appeal to Generation Z. Perhaps it can end up being a model for fixing other societal issues as well.
In the course of researching and writing this article, I came across a story about a young boy who served in the Continental Army at just fourteen years old. As our country struggled for its independence, he rose up in the common defense and guarded meat and food for his fellow soldiers. In a full-scale revolution in the face of a foreign occupier, the first generation of Americans banded together to fight and serve one another. That founding generation, while very different and nearly two hundred fifty years separated from Generation Z, leaves us much to aspire to. That young boy risked everything to protect his fellows, his family, his future children, and the cause he believed in.
The experience as a servicemember clearly shaped his worldview as he grew into an adult, and went on to lead a successful private life as a meat packer in upstate New York. He relied on his familiarity with the things he learned in the military and worked to contribute to the local economy. He even went so far as dedicating time to public civic life. He was a model for others, relying on bonds with family, friends, and acquaintances to flourish. He developed along with his fledgling nation but when the British returned in 1812, he once again stepped up to serve. During that war, he was too old to fight and instead helped supply much-needed meat to our troops. When those soldiers received that food, they saw this man’s unique labeling on his barrels with the letters “U.S.” Legend developed from there that this man, Samuel Wilson, was given the nickname that will go down in history as “Uncle Sam”.
Uncle Sam saying “I want you” became the most iconic recruiting slogan of our nation’s history. Sadly, today’s young people are saying “We Don’t Want You, Uncle Sam.” While this may be a dismal reality, I firmly believe that we have a chance to turn the tide and change the course of the future. By encouraging open discussion of service in as many venues and conversations as possible, we can begin to reignite Z’s consideration of military service. While this crisis truly presents a significant national security issue, it can also help show a path to increased stability at home and abroad. We must all begin discussing national military service on a more frequent basis, helping Z see that Uncle Sam doesn’t just want them anymore…he needs them, and that their presence can and will make a difference.
The World Today
In-depth analysis and journalism to educate the warfighter on the most important issues around the world today.
A Lost Masterpiece and Missed Opportunity: The Story of a Syrian War Mural - War Murals
Eric served in the Minnesota Army National Guard and US Army Finance Corps as a disbursing manager and now works in supply chain planning. A lover of history, he founded The War Murals Project while deployed in 2019 as an initiative to preserve and share the art and graffiti created by US and coalition troops during the GWOT and works to document the forgotten and overlooked history of the conflict. He can be reached through the Instagram account @warmurals or email: warmurals@gmail.com.
It could be said that art is not confined to museums and galleries; it can be found in every corner of our world, waiting to be discovered. Well before ‘Kilroy’ was reminding others where he had been on the frontlines of the Second World War, Soldiers have been leaving their mark in dangerous and austere locations- leaving a legacy that endures to this day and which begs to be preserved.
More than two years after victory was declared over the Islamic State in December 2018, and the orders for an unexpected withdrawal of U.S. Troops came down from the White House, the US military continues its ongoing mission to defeat Daesh in Northern Syria. There, an estimated 900 service members are still supporting Operation Inherent Resolve and they are taking part in the long and rich tradition of expressing themselves by leaving their artistic mark in combat zones.
Tens of thousands of art pieces painted on concrete blast walls and pieces of construction plywood once decorated the hot and dusty bases in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Kuwait. But nearly all of these pieces, which had been carefully created with whatever paints and supplies a veteran artist was able to get their hands on, have long since been painted over, abandoned, or destroyed, with few exceptions.
In 2021 at a forward operating base in Syria, Soldiers largely from the Alabama and Louisiana Army National Guard serving under Task Force Warclub were looking to leave their mark and emphasize the involvement of the US military within the context of the long and perplexing Syrian War.
The result was breathtaking, an incredible 4 by 12-foot reinterpretation of Picasso's legendary 1937 masterpiece, Guernica, on the walls in the dining facility of a base known as RLZ. This version showcases a US soldier leaning out of his MRAP trying to make sense of the quagmire around him: an emaciated goat and suffering horse are tangled up in barbed wire amidst the turmoil of a destroyed attack drone and the body of an ISIS militant as an explosion rocks the scene overhead on a background of churning oil wells. Overall, the piece does well to channel Picasso's cubist representation of the horrors of war and the suffering of the innocent using a muted color palette and distorted figures, while reminding the Soldiers hanging their equipment on the wall before eating their meals of the profound importance of their mission and the challenges they face.
The artist, Captain Peter Drasutis' of the 1-173 Infantry Regiment (ALARNG) under, 256th Infantry Brigade Combat Team (LAARNG) is and artist by trade and outside of the military works as a full time illustrator and designer for Mardi Gras parade floats in New Orleans. He created the cubist representation of the ongoing conflict to instill pride in the Soldiers while displaying a profound and poignant visual narrative that captured the intricate layers and complexities faced by those involved. With the help of several other Soldiers, the mural was completed on plywood over several weeks in the summer of 2021. The mural served as a powerful reminder of the sacrifices made by servicemen and women in the pursuit of peace and stability in the region and was widely celebrated by the servicemembers serving there.
Sadly, despite some initial efforts in 2022 to save this extraordinary piece, it met a tragic fate reportedly around April 2023 when the entrance to the DFAC was redesigned. The mural was taken down, unceremoniously torn into pieces, and subsequently vanished from sight- its final fate unknown.
This unfortunate occurrence illustrates something that has been all too common during the Global War on Terror. Countless war memorials, murals and paintings, created by soldiers for soldiers, have been lost, destroyed, or left to wither away in the desert sands of the Middle East with little regard for documentation or preservation.
Organizations such as The War Murals Project and Graffiti of War have recognized the urgent need to document and preserve these authentic and deeply meaningful artworks, and have taken up the crucial task of independently archiving them where there appears to be a gap in the military's history departments in documenting such valuable cultural expressions.
As Captain Drasutis’ piece was relatively light, made of wood and able to be broken into several pieces, we really missed an opportunity to preserve it, unlike the heavy t-wall barrier art pieces ubiquitous in the GWOT. We must take this as a lesson that we must strive to ensure that these poignant visual testimonies are saved for posterity.
The artistic contributions of soldiers like Pete Drasutis are a testament to the indomitable human spirit amidst the ravages of war. These murals encapsulate the lived experiences, emotions, and unique perspectives of those who have stood on the frontlines of the Global War on Terror. A rare opportunity for expression in a culture famous for being uniform, pieces like these offer a snapshot for servicemembers to truly say “we here here,” “this is us and who we are,” “this is who we honor or what was important to us at this time."
Logistically, taking these art pieces down would have no doubt posed challenges, but one would guess that there were plenty of avenues that could have been explored.- After all, the US Military has its own Field Historians or Military History Detachments in relevant regions. But it seems that the work of documenting and preserving these works often falls on chaplains, contractors, or individual Soldiers. They struggle to find opportunities to forward art pieces to safer permanent bases in places like Kuwait, Jordan, or even Iraq that might offer safer destinations for the art’s temporary storage.
I don’t think we would have had much of a problem finding a home for these works either. For example, any number of military museums could have served as suitable permanent homes for Drasutis’ mural, given their focus on preserving military history and artwork created by soldiers. No doubt there will be future wars American Servicemembers will be asked to fight and because of that it is imperative that the military recognizes the importance of documenting and protecting these powerful visual narratives and flashes of expressions which, arguably, are some of the purest forms of art. They are pure forms of expression because they are so often created in the moment and done neither for wealth or critical acclaim. Thus, capturing this art and graffiti will contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the human experience as it is lived in this and future conflicts. In the near term, it can help the public understand the Global War on Terror.
Through concerted efforts and collaborations with various institutions and individuals, we can ensure that the artistic expressions of soldiers like Pete Drasutis endure, immortalizing their contributions to history and offering future generations invaluable insights into the realities of war.
Beyond Moore's Law: Guiding the Future of Tech – Zachary Whitmore
Zachary Whitmore is an F-35B Powerline Mechanic for the Marine Corps, who is currently expanding his technological prowess by working towards a bachelor’s degree in Computer Science. His unyielding curiosity fuels his enthusiasm for embracing and implementing forthcoming technological innovations.
Social Media: linkedin.com/in/zacharywhitmore/
Gordon Moore's influential 1965 paper, "Cramming More Components onto Integrated Circuits," set in motion many of the advancements in technology we know today. In this pioneering work, Moore predicted a trend that would become the foundation for technology as we know it. Moore stated that there would be an “exponential increase in the number of transistors we could fit on a microchip every two years” (Moore 261). Known as Moore's Law, this prediction has propelled advancements in processing power, speed, and efficiency across all digital devices at a near-constant rate over the previous 5 decades.
Moore's Law has widespread implications that go beyond technology, encompassing areas such as healthcare, entertainment, and convenience in our daily lives. It not only impacts the devices we use constantly but also influences our socioeconomic structures and fundamentally shapes our existence. The effects of technological advancements at the rate predicted by Moore is evident in the shift from unwieldy desktop computers to sleek and powerful laptops. Similarly, smartphones have evolved from basic communication tools into versatile gadgets functioning as cameras, GPS navigators, portable media players, and even minicomputers thanks to continued advancements driven by Moore's Law. Even watches, once a simple device strictly for time, provide notifications and applications right on your wrist.
This rapid progress and influence has had a profound impact on the growth of artificial intelligence (AI) by providing the computational power required to drive AI advancements. The increase in the number of transistors on microchips, as described by Moore's Law, has enabled the development and deployment of increasingly powerful processors and hardware. As a result, the continuous improvements in "processing power, particularly for graphics processing units (GPUs), have contributed to the exponential growth and advancement of AI" (Machkovech 2). This surge in GPU capabilities has led to the development of more intricate and efficient algorithms for AI applications. Additionally, tech giants such as Google recognize the potential benefits and have devised specialized hardware specifically for these applications with the use of smaller, more powerful microprocessors. These devices have been designed specifically to optimize machine learning computations even further, and as a result, their introduction has brought about enhanced performance levels in various aspects of the field of AI. From improved pattern recognition, integration into search engines, built-in autocorrection, and even performing our mundane tasks. This has been a critical factor in the evolution of AI technologies and their widespread adoption.
Moore's Law has also had a significant impact on the entertainment industry. The advancement of smaller yet more powerful devices has revolutionized how we consume media, essentially wiping away the days of forced commercial breaks through an abundance of streaming services. Allowing new, more innovative ways to interact with media through augmented and virtual reality encounters, as well as high-definition gaming brought on by improved graphics processing units. All leading to a sense of entitlement among consumers and increasing pressure on manufacturers to provide additional high-tier content, as an increasing number of people gain access to on-demand entertainment through mobile devices.
Moreover, the healthcare sector has experienced significant advantages due to Moore's Law. This law, based on its fundamental principle, has expedited “progress in medical imaging, genomics, and personalized medicine.” (Tardi 6). As a result, it has revolutionized how healthcare is provided by bringing about substantial improvements such as smaller and more powerful MRI machines, along with a remarkable increase in genome sequencing and mapping. This allows for quicker and more precise diagnoses from medical professionals. Essentially, saving the lives of many through an increased database of knowledge and an efficient way to navigate information
However, Moore's Law continues to show its age through concerns that cast doubt on its uninterrupted trajectory. One of these concerns stems from the heat generated by the exponential surge in the number of transistors packed onto integrated circuits, presenting challenges in adequately cooling these densely populated components. Furthermore, the economic sustainability of Moore's Law has come under scrutiny due to the escalating expenses associated with establishing and operating state-of-the-art semiconductor manufacturing facilities. As we delve into these issues, it becomes evident that the landscape of technological advancement is evolving, prompting the industry to navigate a complex terrain of limitations and innovations. As a result, only a limited number of companies can afford to participate in the continued race for smaller, more efficient transistors. As we’ve progressed from using 16,536 transistors to send a man to the moon in 1969 to the iPhone 14, which contains 16 billion transistors less than 5 nanometers in size, this situation has influenced the development of alternative business models and collaborative approaches to research to alleviate the escalating costs of production and progress. These innovations are allowing further technological advancement through an expansion of innovative design and the development of new manufacturing processes.
While facing these significant obstacles, there has been a growing focus on research and development in key areas such as "3D stacking of transistors, carbon nanotubes, and graphene two-dimensional materials" (Roser para. 3). These efforts may hold the potential to surpass the limitations that have threatened Moore's Law's future. They may either extend their impact or even establish new principles that will shape our oncoming technological revolution. These ideas will incorporate functionalities that do not necessarily follow Moore's Law but go beyond its scaling principles. One such example is the integration of non-digital features like sensors and actuators into electronic devices. Moreover, emerging technologies such as quantum computing, neuromorphic computing, and nanotechnology offer alternative approaches to traditional silicon-based computation systems, which could potentially surpass the exponential growth described by Moore's Law and help circumvent the foreseen death of Moore’s Law.
Companies like IBM are currently engaged in the study of quantum computing, which is a "rapidly emerging technology that harnesses the laws of quantum mechanics to solve problems too complex for classical computers" (“What Is Quantum Computing?”). By utilizing quantum bits known as "qubits," quantum computers can solve intricate problems exponentially quicker than traditional computers and can be utilized to handle that information on a subatomic scale. As research and development endeavors escalate in this field, it is conceivable that a quantum version of Moore's Law could take shape, wherein qubit quantities on a single chip double every few years. This would have the potential for significant increases in processing power and a continued technological revolution.
Additionally, the realms of neuromorphic computing are seeing several uses of Moore's Law. Neuromorphic computing is "a method of computer engineering in which elements of a computer are modeled after systems in the human brain and nervous system."( “Neuromorphic Computing - next Generation of Ai.”). and aims to replicate both the structure and operations found within the brain. This technology offers substantial growth and opportunities in advancements related to artificial intelligence and machine learning. Intel is leading the charge on this type of computing with their experimental Loihi chips, which serve as a prime example of endeavors made towards this objective, following a path similar to Moore's Law by consistently enhancing efficiency and performance through creating a process of logical thinking that rivals our own. These innovations allow machines to think and learn as if they were their own beings, momentously increasing technology’s ability to grasp the world around it and adjust accordingly.
Furthermore, the world of nanotechnology is significantly influenced by Moore's Law and holds immense promise to revolutionize a wide range of industries. The technology promises scientific advancement in sectors such as medicine, consumer products, energy, materials, and manufacturing through the "manipulation of matter on a near-atomic scale to produce new structures, materials, and devices” (“Nanotechnology”). These are being utilized for anything from treatment that directly targets cancer cells to significantly enhancing solar panel technology. Overall, harnessing the principles derived from Moore's Law holds considerable power in propelling advancements across various fields through nanotechnology. The exponential growth of computing power, enabled by Moore's Law, has already driven miniaturization, increased integration, and improved energy efficiency in semiconductor devices. By driving innovations and fostering a culture of competition and research, Moore's Law has expanded the technology ecosystem and led to the emergence of transformative technologies like artificial intelligence and data analytics.
Software optimization is another area where this phenomenon becomes apparent. With the constant decrease in hardware size, there will likely be a stronger emphasis on maximizing performance from current hardware. This shift in focus could foster a more balanced approach between advancing hardware and innovating software. An emphasis on maximizing the capabilities of existing hardware has the potential to bring about a new era of efficiency in software development and technology, consequently diminishing the need for a constant increase in individual devices' power. This, in turn, could lead to “sustainable endeavors in the technology field as worries over e-waste and the ecological consequences of obsolescence grow.” (“Moore’s Law and Intel Innovation.”). The evolving landscape is triggering a greater need to prioritize smarter, longer-lasting devices. This hurdle presents a fresh opportunity for pioneering initiatives that stimulate the tech industry, as it prompts exploration into inventive strategies like recycling, reusability, and mitigating environmental damage. These strategies are working to propel Moore’s law into the future.
As we find ourselves on the threshold of a new era, there is ongoing deliberation regarding the future of Moore's Law. While uncertainty looms over what lies ahead, there is no doubt about its established legacy. Originating as an observation within a 1965 paper, this principle went on to become instrumental in propelling the digital revolution and shaping technology's evolution through the rapid advancement of semiconductor technology. The influence of this law has spread across various sectors, initiating progress in personal computing, mobile technology, artificial intelligence, and healthcare. It has paved the way for technological advancements and created a culture of continuous growth that is deeply ingrained within the tech industry. The potential demise of Moore's Law should not be perceived as progress coming to a standstill; rather, it signifies a change in our perspective on advancement. This shift offers numerous opportunities for alternative approaches, such as exploring new forms of computation or adopting broader definitions of progress.
Work Cited
IBM. “What Is Quantum Computing?” IBM, www.ibm.com/topics/quantum-computing. Accessed 14 June 2023.
Moore, Gordon. “Cramming More Components onto Integrated Circuits (1965).” Ideas That Created the Future, 2021, pp. 261–266, https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12274.003.0027.
“Moore’s Law and Intel Innovation.” Intel, www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/history/museum-gordon-moore-law.html. Accessed 21 June 2023.
“Nanotechnology.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 27 Mar. 2020, www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/nanotech/default.html.
“Neuromorphic Computing - next Generation of Ai.” Intel, www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/research/neuromorphic-computing.html. Accessed 9 June 2023.
Roser, Max. “What Is Moore’s Law?” Our World in Data, 28 Mar. 2023, ourworldindata.org/moores-law.
Sam Machkovech - Sep 27, 2022 5:40 pm UTC. “Intel: ‘Moore’s Law Is Not Dead.’” Ars Technica, 27 Sept. 2022, arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/09/the-intel-arc-a770-gpu-launches-october-12-for-329/.
Tardi, Carla. “What Is Moore’s Law and Is It Still True?” Investopedia, 27 Mar. 2023, www.investopedia.com/terms/m/mooreslaw.asp.
Conflating the Mass and Velocity of Ideas – Dr. Kane Tomlin
Dr. Kane Tomlin is a former US Army Master Diver, Special Programs Director for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, and the current IT Security Officer of the Mississippi Department of Health. Kane has deployed twice to Iraq (in 2006-07-08 & 2010-11) and has worked extensively around the globe while a member of the Army’s Engineer Dive Teams. Kane’s research specialty is organized group violence. You can follow Kane at the Good Idea Fairy Substack.
Melvin Kranzberg first debuted his Six Laws of Technology at a software conference in 1985. His First Law states: “technology is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral” [1]. Fast forward eight years to the beginning of the internet era (roughly 1993) and beyond, and many of us have apparently forgotten or conflated the complex interrelationships between technology and the people who create and use it. The combination of technological progress and human decisions and reactions to it, does not change the fundamental nature of humanity, something C.S. Lewis was fond of calling “Chronological Snobbery”, aka the mindset that somehow modern humans are superior in intelligence to our ancestors by virtue of society’s advancements, often thought of as the “appeal to novelty fallacy” [2]. Technological advances themselves tend to provide humanity with various cognitive illusions. In this article, I’m specifically addressing the illusion of ideation and information control. We live in an era of pervasive technological oversight and that tends to give leaders the impression of complete situational awareness and the corresponding command and control ability that is more often than not completely unrealistic [3, 4]. The advent of the globalized internet gave humans information at the “speed of send”, but peed alone is not a panacea for our society’s modern idea merchants. Many of our leaders, our system designers, and our talking head/media classes seem to think that technology itself provides them the capability and mandate to push ideas from the top down at a global scale, while simultaneously preventing the spread of bad ones. In reality, I tend to think the “idea importing/exporting systems” we have today more closely approximate the gravitational systems we have always had, and that ideas are pulled from various sources based on their attractiveness to their audiences. This confounding of push versus pull in systematic thinking is widespread and damaging to our institutions.
In The Revolt of the Public and the Crisis of Authority in the New Millennium, Martin Gurri captures a dynamic that seemingly eludes many of our political, technical, and academic elites. He postulates that widespread internet access democratizes information, facilitating an “instantaneous pull” system, which now competes in the same space as traditional media’s “push system.” In Gurri’s telling, masses are now able to puncture the narratives pushed from above that may have once unified our society through our formalized institutions. Due to the cost of idea dissemination, gatekeepers were thought of as indispensable middlemen, in the same way, distributors were required by our pre-internet logistical system to keep local shops stocked with inventory.
When e-commerce interrupted that business model, the middlemen gatekeepers were suddenly deprived of their power, influence, and income. Our idea gatekeepers are experiencing a similar disruption. These idea gatekeepers have responded to this development, by doubling down. While trying to tighten their grip on information and narrative formation, they are exacerbating popular distrust of their institutions and fueling a spiral of nihilism [5]. Originally published in 2014, Gurri’s prophetic book predated the election of Donald Trump and Brexit, two world-shaking upheavals that confirmed his central thesis. Now, on an almost weekly basis, news stories pop up that further demonstrate his prescience. Although I argue the systemic nature of “idea mass” predates the internet, perhaps chronological snobbery gets us all at some point. In contrast to Gurri, I argue idea spread was always a pull system, but the cost of entry was simply too high for many would-be idea generators to operate without a gatekeeper’s patronage.
Technology alone has not and cannot fundamentally change humanity itself in just the span of a few years or even a few thousand years, nor is technology immune to the impact of human decisions about it [6]. The funding mechanism of TV development for example dramatically impacted how the Internet was monetized through advertising. Technology cannot be neutral because human decisions have impacts on how technology is funded, resourced, developed, and ultimately commercialized. For example, TV technology’s funding mechanism of selling commercials directly impacted the development of web-based technology and ultimately led to the internet’s ubiquitous data collection systems as a means to sustain its advertising revenue [6]. This confounding assumption is especially true today in organizations that are typically slower to adapt to existential competitive forces, for instance, the government. As an aside, note how many historical government innovations are the result of warfare, one of the few times when the government has a direct competitor forcing it to innovate [7].
To fully understand the government’s current self-described “Information Operations” related challenges, it is worth comparing them to the private sector’s challenges circa 1996-2000 with the disruptive technology called the Internet. Prior to the dot-com era, technological development itself had the exact same distribution problems as your local Walmart, namely that once the technology product was complete, it had to be packaged, distributed, installed, etc. each and every time a new capability was added to a system. The pace of software innovation was still being measured in years. When internet applications became possible, a single distribution point was suddenly possible, and desirable. Now, the execution of strategy could harness this technology limited only by the pace of innovation, not distribution. Older client-server models of adaptation were now far too slow to compete. Web-based applications meant that the speed of human adoption became the main limit to technical evolution.
Every person who logs into Amazon, for example, is getting the absolute latest and greatest version of their web-based application’s technological offering, and new features can be released at any time (or all the time). What started as a simple online bookstore now has streaming media, AI-enabled assistants, smart speakers, mobile applications, their own distribution network, etc. Private businesses suddenly became subject to complex problems instead of merely complicated ones, and the ability to create useful and reasonable models broke down. Complicated problems have a finite number of variables that can be mastered, such as manufacturing a motor vehicle. In contrast, complex problems like predicting the weather have so many unknown variables that at best all we can do is a statistical best guess. A collection of early lessons learned from this internet era is the now infamous document called “The Agile Manifesto” published in 2001 [7, 8]. There is a lot of good material included in the agile methodologies first documented in the manifesto, but one of the most important - though technically left unstated in the document - changes to organizational culture that resulted from its adoption was the conceptual movement from push systems of work to pull systems of work.
Push systems of work are organizational systems where ideas start at the top of the organization, while the work necessary to implement these ideas gets “pushed” down from the thinker level to the doer level of the organization. The problem with push systems of work is that they are limited to the speed and understanding of leadership, a group both small and historically risk-averse. In contrast, pull systems of work recognize that ideas themselves have mass in an essentially gravitational sense. To put the point another way, idea mass is the attractiveness of ideas themselves. Idea mass is the recognition from agile methodologies that the “doers of the work” will usually gravitate to some of the most attractive ideas (larger mass) themselves and literally pull the work down from the “to-do list” which we tend to call the backlog. There’s more to agile than this concept obviously, but there is a river of digital ink available to those who wish to learn more.
When one thinks of ideas as having their own mass, one can better visualize some of these pull processes in action. Obviously, ideas were propagated for tens of thousands of years or more before the advent of the internet. The Founding Fathers of the United States reached back to ideas first set forth in ancient Greece and Rome when developing their own ideas about government as set forth in the Declaration of Independence. Those ideas were referenced again in another document called the Constitution, and they seemed to survive the pre-internet era fine enough. So, if idea mass is not technologically dependent, then why do many in modern government think that technology itself is a major causal variable to the spread of misinformation? Why the sudden urgency or frustration around the ideas themselves? By conflating idea mass with idea velocity, the government is trying to control “misinformation” by attempting to use technology itself against human nature, which is a fool’s errand. Technology does not create the mass of an idea; what it can do is increase the velocity of an idea. I use the term velocity in lieu of speed because velocity is the combination of both speed and direction. Ideas do not spread equally in all directions because of technology. In fact, ideas are ultimately pulled by someone along a technological channel of some sort, and in turn, the idea’s mass may alter the velocity of the thinker themselves if the mass is great enough.
Like the US Constitution, the spread of competing religions in the pre-and post-internet era tells us something important about idea systems. Idea mass is at best morally neutral; and, based on our evolutionary psychology, morally bad ideas may even have more mass than morally good ideas, depending on one’s definition of morality [9]. Many of the world’s most popular religions operate in direct moral competition with each other. If idea mass were based solely on what society collectively deemed moral, then we might expect a single religion, encompassing the one moral center mass of humanity, would have emerged in response to our global idea-sharing mechanisms now at the internet scale. So far that appears elusive. Idea mass may not technically be coextensive with its moral value, but we can at least conclude idea mass is an expression of attractiveness. In contrast, what technology is good at is increasing the velocity (speed and direction) of ideas because, as Isaac Newton insinuated, mass multiplied by acceleration is where things get interesting and important.
Technology development and its relationship to the velocity of ideas also has a long and disruptive history. Consider the printing press (30 Years’ War), radio (World War 1), motion picture film (World War 2) television (Vietnam War), and now the internet (insert the contemporary war of your choice here). Where we seem to be getting into trouble now is with our current information gatekeepers in government, media, and no internet platforms in wide usage. Gatekeepers by definition want to have control over which ideas should be afforded mass. But mass is not technically related or therefore technically manageable, velocity is. Gatekeepers appear to be cognitively trapped in attempts to keep the information push system relevant in a pull system environment. One might even argue that the gatekeeper model is simply unrealistic, doubling down on a system when the expected results vary from the intended ones. It’s a variation of the sunk cost fallacy. Gatekeepers can and do attempt to combat misinformation by creating additional “better” content, but when they attempt to instead remove or block the “bad content”, they tend to lower institutional trust and as often as not, end up spotlighting the very idea they were trying to sideline.
Having made it this far, one can apply this pull model to this article itself. This idea of mine has a mass equivalent to at least nine paragraphs worth of your time, regardless of the channel on which you are reading about it. However, the velocity of this article is being facilitated by various technologies like the internet, maybe a printer (if you like to read on paper), and some kind of technical device like a phone or computer that allows you to have received this article much faster than via the mail, and possibly you pull it to you from your preferred channel, instead of having it pushed to you via email. But the velocity of an idea does not cause the mass of the idea. I argue that if and when gatekeepers try to control idea mass, they are simply restricting a single communication channel. If the idea mass of that channel is lower than the idea mass of a competing channel, then idea consumers will simply switch channels. Gatekeepers may be better served instead by engaging in the debate in a manner reminiscent of the earliest US newspapers, which were partisan affairs to be sure, but transparent ones. Some, like my hometown paper the Tallahassee Democrat, and the Detroit Free Press (originally The Democratic Free Press and Michigan Intelligencer) survive today.
I had originally planned to push specific governmental policies to this challenging informational system, but I think that might defeat the purpose of this think piece. Pardon the pun, but I’m purposefully trying to stay as generic as I can be because my goal is to simply use my idea’s mass to potentially alter your thinking velocity in the hopes that the readers will fill in the details as they see fit. Many attempts to describe “what is” can turn into “what should be” which could defeat the point. However, I will share some of my experiences with such a conceptual model. In situations where I think someone’s idea might have factually incorrect elements, I try to focus on the fact or facts that I think are provably incorrect and hope that the inferences of that factual misinformation on one’s conclusion will speak for themselves. Misinformation is not an incorrect idea or perspective in my mind (well, I try anyway, I am a creature of the same systems with my own biases), as much as it is the inclusion of incorrect facts that might have led one to an unrealistic conclusion. Disinformation in this context is purposefully spreading such “bad data” even when the spreader knows it is provably false, which is malicious behavior to be sure. However, it is one that cannot be easily regulated without clearly knowing whether the intent is ignorant or malicious.
1. Kranzberg, M., Technology and history:" Kranzberg's laws". Technology and culture, 1986. 27(3): p. 544-560.
2. Lindsley, A., CS Lewis on Chronological Snobbery. Knowing and Doing, 2003: p. 1-3.
3. McChrystal, S.A., et al., Team of teams : new rules of engagement for a complex world. 2015, New York, New York: Portfolio/Penguin. ix, 290 pages.
4. 2014 Maneuver Warfighter Conference - General Stanley McChrystal. 2014, Benning TV. p. 41:00.
5. Gurri, M., The Revolt of the Public and the Crisis of Authority in the New Millennium. 2018: Stripe Press.
6. Wiggins, C. and M. Jones, How Data Happened: A History from the Age of Reason to the Age of Algorithms. 2023, New York, NY: WW Norton and Co.
7. Mowery, D.C., Military R&D and innovation, in Handbook of the Economics of Innovation. 2010, Elsevier. p. 1219-1256.
8. Beck, K., et al., The agile manifesto. 2001, The Agile Alliance, www. agilemanifesto. org.
9. Robertson, C.E., et al., Negativity drives online news consumption. Nature Human Behaviour, 2023.
——————————
This ends Volume 15, Edition 1, of the Lethal Minds Journal (01SEPTEMBER2023)
The window is now open for Lethal Minds’ sixteenth volume, releasing October 1st, 2023.
All art and picture submissions are due as PDFs or JPEG files to our email by midnight on 20 September.
All written submissions are due as 12 point font, double spaced, Word documents to our email by midnight on 20 September.
lethalmindsjournal@gmail.com
Special thanks to the volunteers and team that made this journal possible:
Really interesting essay by Dr Kane. Understanding information as having a velocity measurable by vectors of transmission could have interesting implications. I'm not sure I would say idea "mass" is an independent variable of velocity however.