The below is a moderately edited version of the speech I gave at my promotion ceremony last week. Thanks to all who attended.
"Technology is nothing. What’s important is that you have a faith in people, and if you give them tools, they’ll do wonderful things with them." - Steve Jobs
When I first embarked on this journey we call a military career, I was captivated by the allure of technology, believing it held the answers to all our challenges. All I wanted to do was fix the tech; everything else should take care of itself, right? But as I delved deeper, I realized technology, in itself, is neutral. Technology is just a tool. Like the weapons of our soldiers, it can be used for good or for ill; it’s merely an amplifier of the intentions and capabilities of its users.
As I was preparing for this speech, I looked over photos from my last promotion — a glimpse into our world seven years ago. The tools and tech we used have evolved exponentially since then, as have the threats we face. The faces, the spirit, the challenges, however? Those remain strikingly familiar. We’re still trying to seek understanding of our systems, and preserve them from harm. We’re still trying to best communicate our understanding to responsible leadership. We’re still trying to balance keeping users safe with keeping them productive.
In my recent endeavors, especially in cloud security and my collaboration with DARPA, I've had the privilege to engage with some groundbreaking innovations. And one thing stood out: Even the most advanced systems require human insight. I was discussing the use of large language models with another group of leaders a few days ago, and we kept coming back to one point: These systems don’t know how to handle uncertainty. They accept information at face value, without discerning its quality or context. They then present information as if 100% true, despite being wrong a significant fraction of the time.
Humans are still in the loop, and will remain in the loop, as it is up to us to provide perspective, to guide and align technology with our goals and values. It's not the tools or the tech that define us. It's the people. It's our relationships. Machines can be upgraded or replaced, but the trust, understanding, and bonds we share? Those are irreplaceable and are the very foundations of our society.
As such, I’d like to thank a few people here today:
• God, for creating this wonderful world and everything in it, and his son Jesus, for giving us flawed humans a chance at redemption.
• My wife, for being the best wife a Soldier could ask for. She takes care of all the little things and has more grit and determination then I could dream of.
• My children, for showing me true resilience in a new age. They’ve grown up in a very different digital world, with omnipresent social media judging your every move. I don’t think I would have survived that environment, but they’ve made their way through it, day by day.
• My mentors, for taking a chance on a young captain who was still figuring out his place in the world. They gave me lessons and the freedom to find my leadership style, and my performance has blossomed because of it.
• My commanders, who have allowed me on multiple occasions to be the point person for tackling tough challenges. I have succeeded in tackling those challenges, but my success has been solely to those selfless individuals in their organizations, many here today, who gave their time freely to design better systems and processes without seeking personal reward.
Finally, my deepest appreciation goes out to each one of you here. Your dedication, resilience, and camaraderie are the real strength behind our Army. If ever you need guidance or support, my door is always open. Together, fortified by our relationships, we stand unyielding. Thank you.
Standard disclaimer: All views presented are those of the author and do not represent the views of the U.S. government or any of its components.
Glad you're writing regularly again Chase.
One thing I wanted to push back on a little though was the part where you wrote "I was discussing the use of large language models with another group of leaders a few days ago, and we kept coming back to one point: These systems don’t know how to handle uncertainty. They accept information at face value, without discerning its quality or context. They then present information as if 100% true, despite being wrong a significant fraction of the time."
While I think this is right in certain contexts, I think recent-gen LLMs might be able to provide a bit more nuance than you've experienced previously. I also think a lot depends on how they were trained (e.g. maybe the ones you've been using are rewarded for accepting your inputs at face value). Would you mind providing an example of a situation where you feel they've fallen short?