4 ms·

UK and Israel have a deal where they can replace the software or some such. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKNPCk-fd8I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKNPCk-

UK and Israel have a deal where they can replace the software or some such. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKNPCk-fd8I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKNPCk-fd8I

jandrewrogers 2y ago
The Israelis weren’t given a choice in the matter. The challenge is that parts of the software required for some key capabilities use advanced computer science R&D that is not in the literature. You can fly the airframe but there is a significant reduction in capability unless you can also produce equivalent algorithms and data processing technology.
- Spooky23 2y ago
  The Mossad is great at industrial espionage, and as the US gov alienates and lets “big balls” exfiltrate critical information, they’ll probably see advancements.
  - tempest_ 2y ago
    Probably don't even need to work that hard. The Saudis got a bunch of nuclear secrets the first round so I am sure F35 info can be brought to Mar a lago.
- spitfire 2y ago
  I have a copy of the original cognitive radar papers. You can find most of them, the real work is doing a real world implementation. I’m not aware of any computer science breakthroughs required for the f35.
  - jandrewrogers 2y ago
    The cognitive radar stuff is old tech. I don’t think that concept is really considered a differentiated capability beyond being a sophisticated implementation. Almost by definition, any classified computer science research would be non-obvious.
    - spitfire 2y ago
      If cr is old tech any keywords for what is new/current tech? I’m not sure your second point is true. The vast vast majority of classified information is very boring, or operational like frequencies of radar, etc. Both sides know the basics, it’s what frequencies the radar comms and aircraft work at that is classified. There’s very little “OMG this one algorithm changes everything!!”. Unless proven otherwise
      - jandrewrogers 2y ago
        That is entirely the point, it is supposed to be surprising. There are fragments of circumstantial evidence for some interesting computer science problems e.g. systems that demonstrably imply transitive closure algorithm performance that can’t be remotely replicated by anything in literature. The ability of someone to imagine the existence of things they are unaware of has no bearing on their existence. You could say the same of a lot of the classified materials science that underpins a lot of US weaponry hardware for which there is ample circumstantial evidence. No one is going to be talking about it on HN.

UK and Israel have a deal where they can replace the software or some such. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKNPCk-fd8I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKNPCk-fd8I

jandrewrogers 2y ago

The Israelis weren’t given a choice in the matter. The challenge is that parts of the software required for some key capabilities use advanced computer science R&D that is not in the literature. You can fly the airframe but there is a significant reduction in capability unless you can also produce equivalent algorithms and data processing technology.

Spooky23 2y ago
The Mossad is great at industrial espionage, and as the US gov alienates and lets “big balls” exfiltrate critical information, they’ll probably see advancements.
- tempest_ 2y ago
  Probably don't even need to work that hard. The Saudis got a bunch of nuclear secrets the first round so I am sure F35 info can be brought to Mar a lago.
spitfire 2y ago
I have a copy of the original cognitive radar papers. You can find most of them, the real work is doing a real world implementation. I’m not aware of any computer science breakthroughs required for the f35.
- jandrewrogers 2y ago
  The cognitive radar stuff is old tech. I don’t think that concept is really considered a differentiated capability beyond being a sophisticated implementation. Almost by definition, any classified computer science research would be non-obvious.
  - spitfire 2y ago
    If cr is old tech any keywords for what is new/current tech? I’m not sure your second point is true. The vast vast majority of classified information is very boring, or operational like frequencies of radar, etc. Both sides know the basics, it’s what frequencies the radar comms and aircraft work at that is classified. There’s very little “OMG this one algorithm changes everything!!”. Unless proven otherwise
    - jandrewrogers 2y ago
      That is entirely the point, it is supposed to be surprising. There are fragments of circumstantial evidence for some interesting computer science problems e.g. systems that demonstrably imply transitive closure algorithm performance that can’t be remotely replicated by anything in literature. The ability of someone to imagine the existence of things they are unaware of has no bearing on their existence. You could say the same of a lot of the classified materials science that underpins a lot of US weaponry hardware for which there is ample circumstantial evidence. No one is going to be talking about it on HN.