In an era when tanks and treaties once defined global power, it’s now revolving around rapid updates and minimizing delays, with built-in settings shaping networked systems. Back then, warfare was primarily determined by counting hardware, such as tanks or missiles, signing treaties to claim land, using standalone equipment, relying on brute force, and drawing hard borders. Today? It’s about software fixes and core network rules, pushing for sensors that work together seamlessly, links with minimal lag, connected setups across oceans, while protecting undersea cables, air capabilities, and space domain awareness. Some creative human-computer interactions and setups transcend borders, such as 5G towers, shared ground stations from allies, and a constellation of satellites.

Electrons, Matter, Intelligence (EMI) by David T Phung is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe

The Invisible War for Defaults

The U.S. isn’t just prepping to win fights; it’s racing to embed its code into tomorrow’s battlegrounds. Defaults, the strategic linchpin, pack a considerable punch. In the context of modern warfare, ‘defaults’ refer to the pre-set configurations and settings in networked systems. Gain control of them, and you’ve locked in the choices that matter most. Over in Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), troops are busy linking sensors, trimming delays, and enhancing the software that determines who sees threats first, when they appear, and how quickly a response can be initiated. We skip over this too often. The true clash is hidden; it’s not about grabbing territory, but seizing tempo to tie unmanned gear across sea, air, and space, while commanders juggle real-time moves to build the kill chain.

Nation-states aren’t confined to their borders anymore, and neither is their gear. From 5G towers to satellite setups like Starlink or edge computing in the field, military strength often relies on components that don’t care about flags; they’re locked into the firmware.

Under that hardware, the real power lies: APIs, access to updates, and security tricks that only the creators know. Want to mess with an enemy’s beat? Cut their ability to connect. Make their tools clash with the network’s backbone.

This is unfolding right now in INDOPACOM. The first island chain isn’t just a spot on a map; it’s a nightmare for connections and contested logistics. If drones, ships, radars, and satellites can’t communicate quickly and securely, all that high-tech equipment becomes useless. In Aaron Bateman’s latest piece “U.S. Space Power and Alliance Dynamics in the Cold War,” it calls back to the Cold War days: places like Nurrungar in Australia’s outback were key U.S. sites for detecting Soviet missile launches early, but placing them on allied land sparked debates over control and vulnerability, as it explores how America’s space edge relied on complex partnerships.

Share

Space Invaders, Silicon, and System Speed

Think of the 1978 arcade hit, Space Invaders, created by Tomohiro Nishikado. It starts slowly, but knocking out aliens speeds it up. Why? Fewer enemies mean less strain on the Intel 8080 processor. Each zap frees up power, cranking the tempo and the pressure.

A hardware glitch evolved into an innovative feature, and a limitation turned into an advantage.

That’s like today’s systems warfare: winning isn’t always about more firepower, but setups that speed up when things get rough. The ‘under-the-radar shift in defense’ refers to the strategic shift towards software, connectivity, and tempo in modern warfare. It’s the blend of brains and tech, constantly adapting to the changing battlefield. As John Boyd put it, ‘Decisions without actions are pointless. Actions without decisions are reckless.’ That’s the heart of it, the blend of brains and tech, constantly adapting to the changing battlefield.

Mechanics, Dynamics, and Aesthetics (MDA) of Modern Warfare

This isn’t just about pure tactics; it’s about crafting effective systems. The MDA framework, pulled from game design at Northwestern University, highlights defense tools:

• Mechanics: The basic rules, protocols, APIs, limits on bandwidth, encryption basics, and barriers to linking up. Think Link 16, JADC2 data flows, or sensor details.

• Dynamics: How it runs in real time, shifting kill paths, auto-targeting, and spread-out command even with lags or jams.

• Aesthetics: What the user feels, speed, clarity, overload, or fog. It’s the system’s feel in the thick of it, where Boyd’s OODA loop shines.

The Tempo doctrine isn’t a dry manual; it’s a seamless connection between people and machines. Tools that align with a fighter’s gut instincts often emerge victorious, underscoring the human element amidst technological advancements. This is a reminder that no matter how advanced our technology becomes, the human element remains crucial in the field of defense.

Game companies could flip this script, making interfaces quick to pick up, easy to master, and great for sharing info. Take *Battlefield*: different areas mix, chats flow easily, and one player’s alert shows up for everyone right away. Defense could steal that idea. Data from sensors, drones, and satellites often gets bottled up because of tight budgets and the hassle of providing tablets or screens to every soldier in the field. Mostly, only officers are allowed to use the fancy gear; there is no sharing over phones for clear security reasons.

Out in the field, as USMC Corporal Kevin Phung, an 0311 rifleman, says, “Currently we have about one tablet per 40 troops.” Data from that lone device drips to squad leaders, who scratch out rough plans with dirt, sticks, paper scraps, or quick sketches to fill in the team. Those mockups? Often wrong on size, missing pieces, or just off, causing mix-ups. Picture if every troop could peek at the officer’s view, say, a heads-up arrow pointing straight to the goal. Then the regular guy doesn’t depend so much on the leader’s spin or memory.

The Tempo Doctrine

Conflicts today don’t fight over networks; they run right through them. When you own the tempo, the decisions fall your way. Own choices, and you set the rules long before the first clash. Boyd’s OODA loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) is the driving force.

Speed helps, but getting your bearings wins. Shift the scene faster than the other side adjusts, and you break their rhythm. That’s what JADC2 aims to achieve: to integrate intelligence, expedite calls, and establish U.S. rules.

We need more than faster weapons; smarter starting points, tighter connections, bolder digs into protocols. Kill chains aren’t just going auto; they’re crafted from the bottom up. It’s not optional, it’s key in today’s rapidly changing world. The urgency of the situation is clear-we need to act now to ensure our starting points are as smart as possible and our connections are as tight as they can be.

The edge isn’t the end; it’s the starting block. Focus on building decision paths that handle real problems, not quick-fix tools.

References

• U.S. Space Power and Alliance Dynamics in the Cold War by Aaron Bateman: [International Security](https://direct.mit.edu/isec/article/50/2/55/133731/U-S-Space-Power-and-Alliance-Dynamics-in-the-Cold)

• John Boyd’s OODA Loop: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop

• MDA Framework in Game Design: https://users.cs.northwestern.edu/~hunicke/MDA.pdf

• Space Invaders History: https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/130574/the_history_of_space_invaders.php

• JADC2 Explained (Modern Battlespace): https://modernbattlespace.com/2021/03/04/what-is-jadc2/

• Indo-Pacific C4ISR Context (Defense One): https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2024/05/indo-pacific-command-and-control/387491/

Powered by: NLT143 | ⚛️⚡️ | Farcaster | X |YouTube Podcast

Electrons, Matter, Intelligence (EMI) by David T Phung is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe