7 ms·
Navy Aims for “Compile to Combat in 24 Hours”
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- lloydde 8y agoWhy convolute the data format and software architecture? The 18 month to 24 hour is gross. That is a lot of words for little real information. I can’t figure out the target audience. My favorite line was “XML is a leading open standard for describing and tagging data in industry” which could be rewritten to “For more than 20 years...”
- childintime 8y agoIf I were the enemy I too would have them choose XML.
- lloydde 8y agoMaybe that is it! This is propaganda to have the enemy work on DTDs and XML transformations.
- MaxGabriel 8y ago> The concept is based on web services, or micro-services, similar to those you would see on your smart phone :thinking_face:
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- shp0ngle 8y agoAgile, machine learning, cloud, microservices... I wonder if they will also add ICO and blockchain in there.
- disqard 8y ago...and don't forget Big Data. Or is it no longer in fashion?
- NickNameNick 8y agoIf it fits on a single ship, it's not really big data... /s
- raverbashing 8y agoYour big data is on the blockchain now (or something like that)
- dig1 8y agoNope. Everything should be on blockchain now.
- evil-olive 8y agoJust imagine, if individual Navy ships coordinated their attacks through the blockchain and Ethereum smart contracts, no individual ship commander would need to trust the others. Decision-making in a war could be completely decentralized... /s
- smoll 8y agoWow, I always thought the Byzantine Generals Problem was just a metaphor.
- modin 8y ago> Navy seeks to leverage XML for the benefits that commercial industry enjoys from using it, like the ability to efficiently tag and describe data for use in big data analytics, artificial intelligence and machine learning, [...] It's there. In XML!
- johnsmith2018 8y agoI can't help but think of the beginning of Battlestar Galactica https://en.battlestarwikiclone.org/wiki/Cylon_computer_virus https://en.battlestarwikiclone.org/wiki/Cylon_computer_virus
- trdtaylor1 8y agoThis is obscenely true and somewhat underrated. Sad as it is, the prime reason for the strength of DoD computer systems, both afloat and in the air, is that it's difficult enough to use and interface with them-- 'Hacking' them, and getting the ability to pivot and deny/destroy is extremely limited. Sailor Joe Schmuckatelli's Fire control system is on a separate network because there was no common network at the time the contract was let for competition. It's both the worst and most extreme version of security through obscurity. Now you're introducing more connections, availability, and reliance on a core infrastructure-- Which still won't meet basic corporate cybersecurity / patch control doctrine.
- forapurpose 8y agoThe U.S. military has been very aware of this threat for a few years (though a legacy of disregard precedes that, as they saw no peer threats and were fighting low-tech insurgents). They're not idiots; it's obvious and they hack into their enemy's systems. In fact, they have been focusing on systems and training that enable units to operate while disconnected from the defense networks.
- perl4ever 8y agoI can't help but think of: "The ultimate cause of our failure was a simple one: despite all statements to the contrary, it was not due to lack of bravery on the part of our men, or to any fault of the Fleet's. We were defeated by one thing only - by the inferior science of our enemies. I repeat - by the inferior science of our enemies."
- AYBABTME 8y agoJoin the military to work on leading edge technology like XML and SAML? Why do people think the military has advanced technology? Aside for aerospace stuff, it seems like they're hugely behind the commercial world.
- ethbro 8y agoThe innovation is mostly in hardware, albeit they're trying to move as much of that as possible to CotS. At a tactical level, better hardware with dated but tested software > inferior hardware with the newest software. Edit: To elaborate, there are almost no startup spaces where someone is actively trying to degrade your systems as they're being used. That changes a lot of calculus.
- forapurpose 8y agoThat's not my understanding, based only on reading foreign policy publications. For many years, the U.S. military has seen software as the key and hardware as just a platform to carry it (to oversimplify a vast domain of technology). With the F-35, for example, many critics focus on the hardware while the military focuses more on the software. For example, if your signal processing is better then you detect the enemy before they see you, shoot first, and win. If your networking is better, then you share information faster, adjust operations and tactics too fast for the enemy to keep up with, and win.
- nightski 8y agoSeriously? You are judging the project on the serialization format they use? Who cares what it does or how it serves it's users right? Not to mention that XML is actually not all that bad of a technology. Not my first choice, but it is fine.
- dean177 8y agoWhy isn't it your first choice?
- 8y ago
- ethbro 8y ago"This transformational architecture is called “Compile to Combat in 24 Hours,” and was recently piloted this spring aboard several Navy units. The concept is based on web services, or micro-services, similar to those you would see on your smart phone, and use of a new cloud architecture Navy is developing and testing, and fielding this capability quickly and securely. It involves decomposing legacy/monolithic applications into agile micro services, developed in the cloud and synchronized with the tactical cloud shipboard. The cloud environments are designed for machine learning and artificial intelligence capabilities and will “package and prioritize” data exchanged between the ship and shore clouds to get commanders the information they need for improved decision making and lethality." ... that poor, confused PR author.
- lloydde 8y agoIt’s poor, confused PR all the way down. The linked origin article is also glorious, http://www.doncio.navy.mil/CHIPS/ArticleDetails.aspx?ID=10218 http://www.doncio.navy.mil/CHIPS/ArticleDetails.aspx?ID=1021... with classics like “ubiquity of micro web services in the commercial world and in each individual smartphone“ which may be trying to say something about RESTful APIs.
- ethbro 8y agoThat's the tragedy: you can almost see the conversation between an engineer and the author. Lost in translation, indeed.
- mark_l_watson 8y agoGood read! Also good architectural and delivery decisions, considering the constraints they work under.
- TickleSteve 8y ago</sarcasm> surely?
- mark_l_watson 8y agoNo sarcasm. I was a defense contractor (programmer) from the 1970s into the 1980s and I understand the constraints they work under.
- everyone 8y agoTLDR -> The US navy will be making their warships much more conveniently hackable.
- ker0jo 8y agoI wouldn’t have thought moving infrastructure from on ship servers to ‘the cloud’ would be a tactically sound move.
- otakucode 8y agoYou can have quick development. You can have reliable, predictable systems. You can not, ever, have both.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- jonnydubowsky 8y agoI would love to hear feedback from the officers whose daily operational experience is effected by these improvements. I wonder what kind of beta testing they do, and if they continuously refine the architecture and design choices after receiving rounds of feedback from active combat experiences?