Republican members of Congress are now ordering DARPA to end their work on Robotic Servicing of Geosynchronous Satellites. Why are they ordering them to stop? Because, according to National Space Policy guidelines, DARPA might be conducting operations that are potentially discouraging similar research in the private sector. Hmmmm :-(.
Republican congressmen orders DARPA to stop their work for in-space satellite services; DARPA refuses. — B.J. Murphy for Serious Wonder.
WASHINGTON: Three influential House lawmakers have asked DARPA in a Jan. 25 letter to review a robotic space repair program to see if it violates the National Space Policy by competing with private-sector efforts and to put the program on hold until the review is complete. The National Space Policy requires “that the government not build or buy systems that “preclude, discourage or compete” with commercial systems. Orbital ATK is building a system it believes competes directly with the DARPA initiative, known as Robotic Servicing of Geosynchronous Satellites.
It’s an intriguing program. DARPA’s goal is to develop robotic systems that can fix damaged satellites 22,000 miles up. In the words of the program web page, it would be designed to “make house calls in space.”
But Rep. Jim Bridenstine, one of the most active lawmakers on space issues today (and possibly the next head of NASA); Rep. Barbara Comstock, chair of the House Science, Space and Technology subcommittee on research and technology; and Rep. Rob Bishop, chair of the House Natural Resources Committee, signed a letter today asking Acting DARPA Director Steven Walker to review RSGS to ensure it complies with the National Space Policy’s requirement that the government not build or buy systems that “preclude, discourage or compete” with commercial systems.
DARPA licenses embedded FPGA tech for U.S. government projects.
The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, also known as DARPA, just signed an agreement to work with Flex Logix, a semiconductor start-up, to develop the young company’s EFLX embedded FPGA technology for use by any company or government agency designing integrated circuits for the U.S. government.
FPGAs have been widely used in systems since the 1980s and, at the system level, provide flexibility and programmability different from what processors can do. Many years ago, ARM took the idea of a processor chip and offered a processor architecture, which could be embedded in chips. Although it took time, embedded processors are now nearly ubiquitous. Flex Logix is doing the same for embedded FPGAs.
Nice. I want one.
A revamped and rebranded NanoFabrication Kingston has launched with the goal of increasing activity outside of Queen’s University.
“We want to be open to the eastern Ontario community, industry and government as well as academia outside of Queen’s to make, characterize and test devices and samples that are small,” said Rob Knobel, Queen’s University professor and a lead researcher at NanoFabrication Kingston.
The lab’s basis is for the study and creation of innovations that require a scale of millionths of a millimetre.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is in its crucial developmental stages and the government doesn’t seem to be to keen on shaping the way forward, according to experts during a senate inquiry into the dawn of AI.
The senate’s Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, under the helm of Texas Senator ® Ted Cruz, convened November 30 to discuss the state of AI research and development, and its policy effects and implications on commerce. According to experts present at the hearing, the government isn’t doing much to provide guidelines and directions on AI research.
The experts, including Microsoft Research’s managing director Eric Horvitz, believe the government is in a unique position to shape the future of AI – especially since AI is still in its developmental stages. Horvitz said AI innovation can help in areas such as homelessness and addiction where there’s not much investment from the industry yet — which the government can help pursue.
A coalition of 13 organizations, including think tanks like TechFreedom and High Tech Forum, called on Congress to pass legislation that would loosen regulations on electronic cigarette manufacturers that took effect last year.
The rules were finalized by the Food and Drug Administration in May and went into effect in August. The groups are challenging the FDA’s “deeming rule” that requires e-cigarette makers to go through what the coalition considers to be a “lengthy and expensive” application process for products that were not on the market before Feb. 15, 2007.
“The FDA has reflexively applied the precautionary principle, giving more weight to theoretical concerns about problems that might arise rather than any concrete evidence of harm,” the organizations wrote in a letter Tuesday to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). “In doing so, the agency is depriving smokers of a demonstrably safer alternative out of pure speculation.”
Concerned that scientific views are not being properly represented in Washington, a new nonprofit group wants to get more scientists elected. 314 Action, named after the first three digits of pi, wants scientists to embrace the political process, running for all levels of government. The group’s aim is to get as many scientists elected as possible in the 2018 elections.
314 Action sees particular urgency for its work due to the rise of anti-science rhetoric on the Hill, especially from the right. The current Republican standard bearer President Trump has questioned the idea that climate change is caused by humans and seemingly encouraged debunked anti-vaccination opinions. With the appointments Trump made so far, it’s hard to believe his administration will advance scientific causes.
The 314 Action group describes its members as people who come from the STEM community whose goals are to increase communication between STEM community and elected officials, to actually elect STEM-trained candidates to public office, to increase presence of STEM ideas through the media, and to prevent the U.S. from falling further and further behind the rest of the world in math and science education.
This is one of those situations that I often get conflicted over. Yes, it’s good to keep people safe; however, at what cost is too much? As, one person’s interpretation of a bad web site is not the same for others. Such as when Nelson Mandela led the whole anti-apartheid movement he was considered then a terrorist. And, the 1960s when Dr. King fought for real equal rights for all people; he was deemed by US government a terrorist. And, neither one of these situations where anything like ISIS today. So, it is a very tricky situation; and hope the courts can help us ensure things are legally done the right way.
DARPA is soliciting software that distinguishes between anti-American slogans and true intent to kill on a global scale.
