All Quiet on the Second Front
Author: Second Front
Subscribed: 52Played: 918Description
If Between Two Ferns and C-SPAN had a child, it would be All Quiet on the Second Front. Blending the very best (and the worst) of government gravitas with technical expertise, Second Front Systems’ Chief Executive Officer, Tyler Sweatt, cuts through the noise and the bureaucratic BS surrounding all things defense tech, national security, and government markets. Be warned: this is not your typical military or government podcast. As host, Tyler has an uncanny ability to get people to talk honestly, making candid conversations that are equally informative and entertaining. All Quiet on the Second Front is the much-needed integrator connecting listeners to experts across fields in an approachable format that offers a fun experience with real conversations, driving real change in the defense tech industry and U.S. national security. Learn more about Second Front Systems at SecondFront.com
I think it gets even more complicated than you describe. There are 'layers of truth', necessarily so, and there are 'demographic bell curves' that must be acknowledged. The 'magic' of the written word, its power, goes almost unnoticed today, but its still there. There are still an uncomfortable amount of people who passively consume them without filter. Radio tapped that power 80 years ago, and today video has exploited it further still. The screen itself has become an authority and it doesn't seem to matter who wrote, said, or filmed it. How do you 'safeguard the vulnerable'? If engaging reason is not an option, do you have to engage emotions? Do you have to distract? Preoccupy? Misdirect? If that's so, how do you simultaneously engage the 'less susceptible'? Where's the balance, both ethically and informationally, between one sort of engagement and the other? I don't know the answer. I dwell on the question, but the perspective 'my layer' affords only obscures the solution, if one ex
Asking ChatGTP to summarise will magnify your problems, and if that's what you're doing, God help us. It is a useful tool, but an auxiliary tool, and it must be used as such. The outsourcing of thinking to this thing is the most dangerous thing about it. Not only can it get things horribly wrong in the form of 'hallucinations', but used in the way you describe is to introduce a layer of abstraction and trust beyond justification. If you work for British intelligence you don't talk about it. I call bullshit. Its easier to spot lies than truths. Truth is a process of elimination.
How new are these considerations? https://www.amazon.com/Now-Can-Be-Told-Manhattan/dp/0306801892 https://www.amazon.com/Winning-Next-War-Innovation-Military/dp/0801481961/ Did we lose ability or motivation? Should we be blowing smoke up arses, or lighting fires under them?
This is how its done! Its almost as if you distilled my private messages from the last three years into bite size highlights, including the positives. Of course this means I learned little new here, it mostly stimulated those bleeding edge questions I dwell on, but that your thinking may be representative of those tasked with addressing these questions is reassuring.