There’s a deeper problem with how we view the world than misinformation, misinformation and propaganda: that we expect that big data means better understanding.
In July 2019, a A swarm of drones plunged into a group of destroyers in the United States Navy off the coast of California, hover over them for long periods of time and then fly to unknown points. Nearly two years later, nobody seems to know who controlled them or what their purpose is. Similar incidents have happened around nuclear power facilities in the US. and Europe. And of course there has been a series of widely reported incidents in recent years, among them US military aircraft were tracking the unknown phenomenon, sparking a new cultural conversation about aliens.
Of course, the above phenomena do not explain nothing new. But UFO sightings in the 1940s and 1950s – in the first wave of public interest – were accompanied by only witness or, in some cases, accounts, extremely lumpy film or photo, today there will be more data: radar tracking, high-quality digital video and photo, other types of signatures, etc.In a world where more and more data is being produced and collected , it would be difficult for anything to move through it without leaving a trace.
There is a lot of emphasis there on “should”. Amid a growing drum beat of rapid technological progress, we might be fooled into thinking it is possible to legally do difficult things: get a positive ID on small, fast-moving objects in the air, For example.
And that points to a more fundamental architectural problem about how we approach emerging security challenges. We have been told Moreover the present revolution in military affairs is driven by data. Certainly, there’s an element of truth here: the speed at which sensors and processing devices have evolved over the past four or five decades surpass those that other technologies have.
But it would be a mistake to assume that more data means more information, or more information necessarily means more knowledge. More data most of the time means more complexity and inherent ability to understand it. We are told that the solution to this is, effectively, more sophisticated tools for managing, parsing, and interpreting that data. Artificial intelligence and better human-machine interfaces will streamline the vast amount of data that arrives and allow humans to make quick, accurate, aggregate-based decisions.
But it is not enough to wait for those technologies to develop that they can start to grapple with the problem. The amount of data generated in the world which can be exploited in a number of fashions has grown exponentially over the years. Here is a structural problem: the drivers tightly wrapped together to the economic and cultural trajectory of the world.
And this doesn’t even take into account the deviation of what could, in general, be called “bad” data: false information, misinformation, deep deception, propaganda, etc. That complicates the picture, but the fundamental problem is not just Information warfare: it is inherent in the complex relationships of our society, our technology, and our world.
Here, I should add a warning. The world is always complicated, and what a categorical mistake it is to combine reality complicated with ours cognitive abilities complication. And this ability to perceive complexity doesn’t inherently make the world any safer or any less. It is the distance between these two factors that the danger lies in: believing we understand the world better because we have more data, to convince ourselves that more data means control. more. This is also the case.
And that brings us back to mysterious flying objects. Are mysterious drones a threat? It is quite possible that they are not, and it is entirely possible that they reflect a set of unrelated, random events rather than some sort of coordinated plot. But in a world where we can watch the wars unfold – or the global shipping network falls into chaos thanks to A large boat was trapped – in real time from our phones we increasingly expect that mysteries will be solved quickly, cleanly and comprehensively. We will try to remember the gap between the amount of data we have and the ability to understand it and pay attention to that gap.