image transcript (via tesseract-ocr)

SECRETARY OF WAR

1000 DEFENSE PENTAGON

WASHINGTON, DC 20301-1000

DEC - 9 2025

MEMORANDUM FOR ALL DEPARTMENT OF WAR PERSONNEL

SUBJECT: Harness Artificial Intelligence Now with GenAl

I am pleased to introduce GenAl.mil, a secure generative artificial intelligence (Al) platform for every member of the Department of War. It is live today and available on the desktops of all military personnel, civilians, and contractors. With this launch we are taking a giant step toward mass Al adoption across the Department. This tool marks the beginning of a new era where every member of our workforce can be more efficient and impactful.

The first GenAl platform capability is Google Gemini, a frontier Al application that can help you write documents, ask questions, conduct deep research, format content, and unlock new possibilities across your daily workflows. Gemini is the first of several enterprise Al applications that will be rolled out on the GenAI platform. It is secure, certified up to Impact Level 5 (ILS), and is fully authorized to handle CUI.

Victory belongs to those who embrace real innovation. Rather than being reliant on the dusty, antiquated systems of a bygone era, we are thinking ahead here in the Department of War. GenAl.mil is part of this monumental transformation. It removes wasted time and focuses more of our energy into decisive results for the warfighter.

Access is straightforward. Navigate to GenAl.mil and you will be able to access the tool with your CAC. The platform is certified secure for operational use on NIPR.

I expect every member of the Department to log in, learn it, and incorporate it into your workflows immediately. Al should be in your battle rhythm every single day.

It should be your teammate. By mastering this tool, we will outpace our adversaries. The power is now in your hands.

memo via https://xcancel.com/kenklippenstein/status/1998829304856068344

  • Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.caEnglish
    1·
    1 month ago

    It can be, but that’s not the context in which it is being used here. The actual warfighting significance of the “battle rhythm” is derived from the older OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) Loop concept which was how a conflict was to be prosecuted until you were victorious. The idea being that if you could get through your OODA loop faster and more correctly than the opposing side you would outmaneuver and outfight them.

    You would thus have a warfighting battle rhythm which set up the inputs that would feed into a however you were processing the information leading to a decision point that would result in an executable plan to be carried out. You would then observe the follow on impacts of that execution and then the process starts all over again.

    The crux of the idea is that, due to the abundance of practical cases and information gleaned from various exercises, you know exactly how fast you can gather the info, process it, decide and execute and this you can set up a timeline for your entire operation.

    Never turns out that way in practice though due to what our friend Mr. Clausewitz referred to as “friction”. It can also lead to indecision as you get stuck on the “observe” and “decide” parts and then folks start chucking the responsibility for that decision upwards as they seek a perfect solution. Which is why I tend to advise “an okay plan applied immediately and vigorously is far better than a perfect plan ten minutes too late”.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      1·
      1 month ago

      OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act)

      Or, as it was known in non-military circles back in the day: “Look before you leap”.

      how a conflict was to be prosecuted until you were victorious

      Or dead.

      if you could get through your OODA loop faster and more correctly than the opposing side you would outmaneuver and outfight them.

      Suuuuure…

      Which is why I tend to advise “an okay plan applied immediately and vigorously is far better than a perfect plan ten minutes too late”.

      Which obviously depends on what you’re planning. If you’re planning D-Day, another 10 minutes to get a perfect plan is worth the wait. If you’re planning how you’re going to attack a machine gun nest that’s currently shooting at you, 10 minutes of being shot at might be too long.

      I get that you need to find a balance between completely winging it when planning or fighting a war, vs being caught in analysis paralysis. And, that the more experienced you are, the more you can figure out the optimal balance between the two, and that allows you to be more predictable, which allows higher-ups to have more consistent plans. IMO, this just makes the idea of using AI in your “battle rhythm” even more stupid. Take something where decades of institutional experience allows you to predict a certain “rhythm”, now throw AI into the mix and its ability to quickly spit out a plausible looking output that’s answer-shaped and you either have to explicitly trust the magic 8-ball’s output, or you have to spend an unpredictable amount of time going over the output to see if it is flawed. Either way, you disrupt this rhythm that’s apparently so important.

      • Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.caEnglish
        1·
        1 month ago

        Actually yes. A not insignificant part of battle planning is to try and disrupt the opposing side’s OODA loop. The whole idea was to make it so you could react faster and more appropriately.

        Lots of the tools and information processing systems used in the modern battlefield are designed to quickly take raw data and present that into a format which the decision maker can use to actually make the correct decision.

        Which is why I am leery of using AI in this fashion. Oh sure, if you want to use it to create a briefing note on the forecasted widget usages, meeting minutes about the feasibility of a Christmas party at Montana’s or so on, that’s fine but to actually parse and data that will result in application of lethal force is a whole different kettle of fish.

        Now yes, there are currently systems that are Auto Engage, but they are very much not AI and the only thing they are generally used for is anti air defense where you have a very limited window in which to successfully prosecute a threat.