Latest news with #RANDEurope
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
North Korea's new warship may have been aided by Russian tech, and it's a worrying development
North Korea unveiled a sophisticated new naval vessel, the Choe Hyon, on Friday. Military analysts told Business Insider its weapons might have been developed with Russian aid. The closer relationship between Russia and North Korea is a worrying sign for the West. In a ceremony in the North Korean port of Nampo on Friday, Kim Jong Un unveiled the Choe Hyon, a 5,000-ton frigate that appears to be outfitted with an array of powerful weapons systems, such as missile vertical launchers. Perhaps equally worrying for those in the West, military analysts said that some of the vessel's capabilities point to Russian involvement, or at least Russian inspiration, as the Kim regime builds modern warships. "The timing of the ship's construction and the question marks around the exact nature of Russian support for the DPRK suggest that it might well be more than a simple copy," Jacob Parakilas, a research leader for Defence Strategy, Policy and Capabilities at RAND Europe, told Business Insider. (Parakilas referred to North Korea by the acronym of its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.) The warship could point to further evidence of a deepening military relationship, and comes at a time when both countries said officially for the first time that North Korean troops are fighting alongside Russia against Ukraine. The Choe Hyon is bristling with weapons systems, with images indicating vertical launch systems that could be used to fire cruise or ballistic missiles, a deck gun, close-in air defense weapons, and a radar to detect threats and targets. Images show the Choe Hyon fitted with a missile defense system that closely resembles Russia's Pantsir S-1, which fires medium-range guided missiles at aerial threats. Parakilas referenced the air defense system as the clearest evidence of Russian involvement. Meanwhile, Kim Duk-ki, a retired South Korean admiral, told CNN earlier this month that Russia may have provided technology for its missile systems. He also said that "if North Korea equips the new frigate with the hypersonic ballistic missile it claimed to have successfully tested in January, that will cause a game changing impact in the regional security." Evidence is emerging that Russia could be helping North Korea evade international sanctions by providing it with technology to strengthen and modernise its military. In March, James Patton Rogers, executive director of the Cornell Brooks Tech Policy Institute, told the BBC that Russia likely helped North Korea design a new AI-enabled drone. Parakilas said the sheer number of weapons on board the Choe Hyon points to possible Russian influence, with Russia also favoring smaller, heavily armed vessels. "It also reflects a philosophy that the purpose of a warship is to wage total war, rather than to be capable of a range of operations up to and including war," he said. But Joseph Bermudez Jr., Korea chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, cautioned that no evidence existed of "direct Russian assistance" in its construction. He said that "North Korean naval personnel designers have seen more and more Russian vessels" and may be imitating their design. Even so, he said that the vessel's weapon systems have "an awful lot of capability." According to a January report by the International Institute of Strategic Studies think tank, the frigate appears to be around 120 meters long, making it the "largest North Korea has constructed by some margin." North Korea has around 374 smaller patrol and coastal vessels, the IISS said, as well as two older frigates. At the launch event, Kim said that North Korea would be ready to fully deploy the ship in about a year, while touting it as a defense against what he portrayed as US regional aggression. Parakilas said the new warship offers North Korea increased options for a potential ballistic missile "first strike," with the capacity to travel to regions where there may be fewer air defense systems. However, he said that "the fact that it is a surface ship and not a submarine means that it can be tracked and attacked relatively easily." In its report, the IISS said that it's only when the vessel enters service that its real capabilities will be observable. "While activity around the new vessel at Nampo will be closely monitored," it said, "it may be some time after launch until its intended use becomes clearer." Bermudez Jr. echoed this, saying that "once it goes out on patrol and we see the seaworthiness of it, that'll make a tremendous difference." Read the original article on Business Insider
Business Insider
29-04-2025
- Politics
- Business Insider
North Korea's new warship may have been aided by Russian tech, and it's a worrying development
In a ceremony in the North Korean port of Nampo on Friday, Kim Jong Un unveiled the Choe Hyon, a 5,000-ton frigate that appears to be outfitted with an array of powerful weapons systems, such as missile vertical launchers. Perhaps equally worrying for those in the West, military analysts said that some of the vessel's capabilities point to Russian involvement, or at least Russian inspiration, as the Kim regime builds modern warships. "The timing of the ship's construction and the question marks around the exact nature of Russian support for the DPRK suggest that it might well be more than a simple copy," Jacob Parakilas, a research leader for Defence Strategy, Policy and Capabilities at RAND Europe, told Business Insider. (Parakilas referred to North Korea by the acronym of its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.) The warship could point to further evidence of a deepening military relationship, and comes at a time when both countries said officially for the first time that North Korean troops are fighting alongside Russia against Ukraine. Missile systems The Choe Hyon is bristling with weapons systems, with images indicating vertical launch systems that could be used to fire cruise or ballistic missiles, a deck gun, close-in air defense weapons, and a radar to detect threats and targets. Images show the Choe Hyon fitted with a missile defense system that closely resembles Russia's Pantsir S-1, which fires medium-range guided missiles at aerial threats. Parakilas referenced the air defense system as the clearest evidence of Russian involvement. Meanwhile, Kim Duk-ki, a retired South Korean admiral, told CNN earlier this month that Russia may have provided technology for its missile systems. He also said that "if North Korea equips the new frigate with the hypersonic ballistic missile it claimed to have successfully tested in January, that will cause a game changing impact in the regional security." A ship for total war Evidence is emerging that Russia could be helping North Korea evade international sanctions by providing it with technology to strengthen and modernise its military. In March, James Patton Rogers, executive director of the Cornell Brooks Tech Policy Institute, told the BBC that Russia likely helped North Korea design a new AI-enabled drone. Parakilas said the sheer number of weapons on board the Choe Hyon points to possible Russian influence, with Russia also favoring smaller, heavily armed vessels. "It also reflects a philosophy that the purpose of a warship is to wage total war, rather than to be capable of a range of operations up to and including war," he said. But Joseph Bermudez Jr., Korea chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, cautioned that no evidence existed of "direct Russian assistance" in its construction. He said that "North Korean naval personnel designers have seen more and more Russian vessels" and may be imitating their design. Even so, he said that the vessel's weapon systems have "an awful lot of capability." A 'first strike' option According to a January report by the International Institute of Strategic Studies think tank, the frigate appears to be around 120 meters long, making it the "largest North Korea has constructed by some margin." North Korea has around 374 smaller patrol and coastal vessels, the IISS said, as well as two older frigates. At the launch event, Kim said that North Korea would be ready to fully deploy the ship in about a year, while touting it as a defense against what he portrayed as US regional aggression. Parakilas said the new warship offers North Korea increased options for a potential ballistic missile "first strike," with the capacity to travel to regions where there may be fewer air defense systems. However, he said that "the fact that it is a surface ship and not a submarine means that it can be tracked and attacked relatively easily." In its report, the IISS said that it's only when the vessel enters service that its real capabilities will be observable. "While activity around the new vessel at Nampo will be closely monitored," it said, "it may be some time after launch until its intended use becomes clearer." Bermudez Jr. echoed this, saying that "once it goes out on patrol and we see the seaworthiness of it, that'll make a tremendous difference."
Yahoo
16-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
OpenAI updated its safety framework—but no longer sees mass manipulation and disinformation as a critical risk
OpenAI said it will stop assessing its AI models prior to releasing them for the risk that they could persuade or manipulate people, possibly helping to swing elections or create highly effective propaganda campaigns. The company said it would now address those risks through its terms of service, restricting the use of its AI models in political campaigns and lobbying, and monitoring how people are using the models once they are released for signs of violations. OpenAI also said it would consider releasing AI models that it judged to be 'high risk' as long as it has taken appropriate steps to reduce those dangers—and would even consider releasing a model that presented what it called 'critical risk' if a rival AI lab had already released a similar model. Previously, OpenAI had said it would not release any AI model that presented more than a 'medium risk.' The changes in policy were laid out in an update to OpenAI's 'Preparedness Framework' yesterday. That framework details how the company monitors the AI models it is building for potentially catastrophic dangers—everything from the possibility the models will help someone create a biological weapon to their ability to assist hackers to the possibility that the models will self-improve and escape human control. The policy changes split AI safety and security experts. Several took to social media to commend OpenAI for voluntarily releasing the updated framework, noting improvements such as clearer risk categories and a stronger emphasis on emerging threats like autonomous replication and safeguard evasion. However, others voiced concerns, including Steven Adler, a former OpenAI safety researcher who criticized the fact that the updated framework no longer requires safety tests of fine-tuned models. 'OpenAI is quietly reducing its safety commitments,' he wrote on X. Still, he emphasized that he appreciated OpenAI's efforts: 'I'm overall happy to see the Preparedness Framework updated,' he said. 'This was likely a lot of work, and wasn't strictly required.' Some critics highlighted the removal of persuasion from the dangers the Preparedness Framework addresses. 'OpenAI appears to be shifting its approach,' said Shyam Krishna, a research leader in AI policy and governance at RAND Europe. 'Instead of treating persuasion as a core risk category, it may now be addressed either as a higher-level societal and regulatory issue or integrated into OpenAI's existing guidelines on model development and usage restrictions.' It remains to be seen how this will play out in areas like politics, he added, where AI's persuasive capabilities are 'still a contested issue.' Courtney Radsch, a senior fellow at Brookings, the Center for International Governance Innovation, and the Center for Democracy and Technology working on AI ethics went further, calling the framework in a message to Fortune 'another example of the technology sector's hubris." She emphasized that the decision to downgrade 'persuasion' 'ignores context – for example, persuasion may be existentially dangerous to individuals such as children or those with low AI literacy or in authoritarian states and societies.' Oren Etzioni, former CEO of the Allen Institute for AI and founder of TrueMedia, which offers tools to fight AI-manipulated content, also expressed concern. 'Downgrading deception strikes me as a mistake given the increasing persuasive power of LLMs,' he said in an email. 'One has to wonder whether OpenAI is simply focused on chasing revenues with minimal regard for societal impact.' However, one AI safety researcher not affiliated with OpenAI told Fortune that it seems reasonable to simply address any risks from disinformation or other malicious persuasion uses through OpenAI's terms of service. The researcher, who asked to remain anonymous because he is not permitted to speak publicly without authorization from his current employer, added that persuasion/manipulation risk is difficult to evaluate in pre-deployment testing. In addition, he pointed out that this category of risk is more amorphous and ambivalent compared to other critical risks, such as the risk AI will help someone perpetrate a chemical or biological weapons attack or will help someone in a cyberattack. It is notable that some Members of the European Parliament have also voiced concern that the latest draft of the proposed code of practice for complying with the EU AI Act also downgraded mandatory testing of AI models for the possibility that they could spread disinformation and undermine democracy to a voluntary consideration. Studies have found AI chatbots to be highly persuasive, although this capability itself is not necessarily dangerous. Researchers at Cornell University and MIT, for instance, found that dialogues with chatbots were effective at getting people question conspiracy theories. Another criticism of OpenAI's updated framework centered on a line where OpenAI states: 'If another frontier AI developer releases a high-risk system without comparable safeguards, we may adjust our requirements.' 'They're basically signaling that none of what they say about AI safety is carved in stone,' said longtime OpenAI critic Gary Marcus in a LinkedIn message, who said the line forewarns a race to the bottom. 'What really governs their decisions is competitive pressure—not safety. Little by little, they've been eroding everything they once promised. And with their proposed new social media platform, they're signaling a shift toward becoming a for-profit surveillance company selling private data—rather than a nonprofit focused on benefiting humanity.' Overall, it is useful that companies like OpenAI are sharing their thinking around their risk management practices openly, Miranda Bogen, director of the AI governance lab at the Center for Democracy & Technology, told Fortune in an email. That said, she added she is concerned about moving the goalposts. 'It would be a troubling trend if, just as AI systems seem to be inching up on particular risks, those risks themselves get deprioritized within the guidelines companies are setting for themselves,' she said. She also criticized the framework's focus on 'frontier' models when OpenAI and other companies have used technical definitions of that term as an excuse to not publish safety evaluations of recent, powerful models.(For example, OpenAI released its 4.1 model yesterday without a safety report, saying that it was not a frontier model). In other cases, companies have either failed to publish safety reports or been slow to do so, publishing them months after the model has been released. 'Between these sorts of issues and an emerging pattern among AI developers where new models are being launched well before or entirely without the documentation that companies themselves promised to release, it's clear that voluntary commitments only go so far,' she said. This story was originally featured on
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ukraine would struggle to defend itself if a cease-fire froze the front lines with Russia
Ukraine is exposed to future attacks if the front lines are frozen as part of a cease-fire deal. Russia's forces are close to Ukrainian cities, including Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. To ensure a lasting cease-fire, Ukraine needs a front it can effectively defend, experts told BI. A cease-fire in Ukraine is moving closer to reality, but freezing the current front line with Russia would leave it vulnerable to another attack. As President Donald Trump is set to talk to Russian President Vladimir Putin later Tuesday, military experts warn that simply freezing the front lines as they stand would likely be a prelude to future conflict, not a lasting solution. This is especially true without security guarantees from the US or enough international peacekeepers to monitor and respond to renewed Russian aggression. There are few naturally defensible positions between the front line and major strategic targets, meaning the temptation for Russia to break a cease-fire deal and take advantage of Ukraine's fragile defensive situation would be high. In an assessment on Sunday, the Institute for the Study of War said that "the current frontlines do not provide the strategic depth that Ukraine will need to reliably defend against renewed Russian aggression." Bryden Spurling, a senior research leader with RAND Europe, told BI that the further west the front line is drawn, the worse for Ukraine given the concentration of strategically and economically vital centers near the front. "So there is a lot at stake in the position of any frozen lines of conflict for Ukraine's future prospects — not just in defense, but economically," he said. Russia occupies about 20% of Ukraine, mostly in the south and east. The front line has shifted over the course of the three-year war. In recent months, Russia has been making incremental but steady gains. The ISW think tank said that Russian forces are close to several major cities. It said they're just across the Dnipro River from Kherson City in south Ukraine, roughly 25 kilometers from Zaporizhzhia City in the east, and 30 kilometers from Kharkiv in the north. It added that the current front line, which is around 600 miles long, would be expensive to defend during a cease-fire, requiring a bigger Ukrainian military, and more support from Ukraine's allies. A January report by the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations said that Ukraine could defend itself effectively by creating a "multilayered territorial defense system" that would involve a hardened defense perimeter, rapid-response forces, and enhanced protection for cities and critical infrastructure. It estimated that this would require about 550,000 active duty Ukrainian military personnel, not to mention another 450,000 in reserve, and would cost between $20-40 billion a year, "comparable to the defense budgets of Israel and South Korea." However, it did point out that this was considerably less than the current wartime expenditures. To deter another Russian attack, Ukraine would need to lay extensive defensive lines of mines, trenches, and artillery, and guard them with enough troops to slow down an assault force so it could rush more resources in. Russia has also hit on a successful mix of weapons including glide bombs and exploding drones to advance against Ukraine, and could use a spell of months to rebuild its stocks. Spurling said that the shorter and less jagged a front line is, the easier it is to defend, and Ukraine would be seeking to draw the line to take advantage of geographical features that gives its defenders an advantage. "Done properly, it's a complex undertaking," he said. On Sunday, the ISW called for the US to back Ukraine in pushing back Russian forces and in establishing a front line along positions that can be more easily defended. "A ceasefire along more defensible positions would also place Russian forces in a more disadvantaged position for renewed offensive operations, making future Russian aggression less likely," it said. Many specifics of a US-backed cease-fire deal remain unclear, if it indeed gets agreed to by both Russia and Ukraine. But whatever shape it takes, it's unlikely that any deal that freezes the current front line will hold, Stefan Wolff, a professor of international security at the UK's University of Birmingham, told BI. He also said that any deal would have to be strong enough to deter Russia from using a cease-fire to rearm and launch a new offensive. If the front line was frozen on its current lines, a strong enough security guarantee from the likes of the US could be a deterrent to Russia, he added. Measures being discussed by some allies include deploying European troops to back up a peace deal, something Russia opposes. "If Ukraine is properly armed and gets some sort of security guarantee, even badly fortified lines might become more defensible simply by virtue of the cost Ukraine could impose on Russia in the future," Wolff said. Spurling added that Ukraine was likely to be more focused on obtaining security guarantees from its allies, rather than the demarcation of the front line. "If Europe or the US are truly willing to provide a genuine backstop in the case of Russian restarting conflict, then that would pose a major strategic dilemma to any future Russian ambitions in Ukraine," he said, "and dramatically increase Ukraine's capacity to absorb any new invasion." Read the original article on Business Insider
