opportunity to achieve a resolution of this profound difficult issue. contrary to the prime minister's assertion, it does not deprive them of the ability or the other effectively to achieve negotiated settlement with the european union on the 17th of october. but it does ensure if he should fail as with his current demand i think he's also likely to do so then it will be time for him to rethink his remarks. mr. speaker, i'm not standing at the next election and -- >> what my right honorable friend except what i think is if you should not just for me but across the house, that would be a great loss? >> here here. [applause] >> i want to make sure everyone is awake out there. good morning. welcome to day number two of the intelligence and national security summit. we hope you enjoyed yesterdays program and the network of your

reception. we do have a pretty full slate of program today, including three plenary sessions, six breakout sessions, the summit concludes this afternoon with what should be a very memorable discussion with most of our top intelligence agency leaders. as a reminder, we value your questions. i hope you saw several of your questions asked yesterday, and in particular, start thinking of your questions and get them and so we can get them up on stage. and again, if you see it up there, think will try to have a scrolling thing to remind you of the e-mail address so please get your questions in. yesterday, you heard a little bit about next weeks classified summit follow one day. based on your feedback we brought the summit format last year by adding a classified

follow one day this year declassified day takes place the week from today on thursday september 12, at nga east campus in springfield. stacy, thanks again for hosting us out there. we are honored to have odni deputy director for mission integration beth kicking off this program. many of you may know beth, but for those who don't, or portfolio is significant. she's responsible for the coordination of the entire communities mission, priorities analysis and collection while also overseeing the national intelligence council, the national intelligence management council, and the presidents daily brief. registration for classified day closes today. cleared personnel can register online at www.intel summit.org, or stop by the kiosk up at the

other end of the exhibit hall. and let them know you would like to attend. later today you receive and events survey after registration e-mail address. please, i know you all get a lot of surveys like i do but once in a while there's one survey that may be worth taking a look at, and we would really, really value your feedback and it will really make a difference. i can tell after having gone through this seven times now of putting the program together for the next year. it's a year-long process that we will take every bit of your feedback into account as a kind put together the following years program picks a please give us your responses. i would like to thank our sponsors again at encourage all of you to take advantage of the opportunities to interact with our exhibitors today. we couldn't do this program without their support, so a round of applause for our sponsors again. [applause]

a few logistical points now at the conclusion of this mornings plenary will have a 30 minute networking break followed by breakout sessions focus on active cyber defense, government collaboration, and technology innovators. and recruiting and developing the future workforce. lunch will be available starting at 11:30 a.m. we will reconvene in the ballroom at 12:30 p.m. for our defending cyberspace plenary. now, tony, it's my pleasure to introduce tony fraser, executive vice president of global field operations to introduce our moderator. tony, over to you. [applause] >> good morning, everyone. as jeff mention my name is tony fraser an executive vice president of global operations at maxr which was formed to the -- formed about two years ago, and we participate in this forum

two different legacy brands. we felt it was important to get closer to this community and become a sponsor of this event because we do about a third of our business with the -- have 1500 team members and given our focus on the company is helping our customers harness commercial innovation this has the intelligence and space infrastructure that there's opportunity to drive mission and transformation in mapping intelligence, communications, space explosion. this is a really important community for us to be more closely aligned with. it's my pleasure to introduce our moderator, tish long. tish is the chair of intelligence national security alliance pictures also the former director of nga. my exposure to tish started when, during my time at digital globe when i heard her share her

vision, and that inspired a lot of innovation, great partnership between industry and government that led to many transformations, you know, from making imagery available across committee on rapid timelines to our global delivery program as well as turning consumers of imagery through programs like noaa. definitely decided about this -- excited about this panel entering some of the insights today that lead to innovation tomorrow. with that please join in welcoming tish. [applause] >> tony, thank you very much, and it's great to see you here this morning and we very much appreciate your continued support of insa and all you're doing for this national security commission. i'm chairman of the board of

insa and i'm very honored to be moderating this very distinguished panel here this morning. i think we'll have some fun, at least that's what i tell them backstage. okay. on the panel when the founder and cto of hawkeye 360 and hawkeye is a data analytics company. stacy dixon, , deputy director a and the former director of. tina, director and and major general john shaw, united states air force who is the deputy commander of air force space command. i'm good at each of them do a short introduction to frame their mission and their priorities. so after we hear from them, i'll start a couple of rounds of questions. as chuck said, please get your questions ready. i've already had a few pop up on the ipad, so we certainly want

to be able to answer your questions from the audience. so chris, over to you. >> take you, tish. first off, thank you do insa for hosting this incredible an important event. tish, thanks for leading the panel. again, chris dumais, one of the founders and chief technology officer for hawkeye 360. my background is in government, spent 14 years both with nsa and in a row. in fact, by lasker but boss is on the panel with me today, and from those experiences i learned quite a bit about government capabilities but more importantly i learned a lot about technology. as i learned about technology i was seeking out opportunity to create something new. the panel today will be a bit about opportunity. hawkeye 360 story is about opportunity. it's about a convergence of new

technologies that enables our capabilities. a convergence of those technologies with customer interest and financial support from a great set of investors. so having the cash, the interest of having to attempt to allow this to be built. it's been a wonderful experience. we are four years old. we raised over $100 million. part. part of the theme i will weave into the conversation day is about how private equity is allowing as to great something that the government can leverage. this isn't just hawkeye. this is all the private industry that is sticking their neck out there to take risks, allowing the government to take less risks in leveraging some of us space-based technologies and capabilities. hawkeye is an rf analytics company but we are building out a space-based constellation of small satellites that are able to detect, locate rf coming off the earth for the purpose of providing geospatial information

about the spectrum of the planet. i'll leave it at that for now. look forward to the questions. thank you. >> very good, chris. stacy. >> stacy dixon, deputy director for national geospatial intelligence agency here been in the fall for just over two months but been with nga since 2010, and we exist to basically show the way, help the country understand the world. we do this by providing geospatial intelligence to policymakers, war fighter, intelligence committee members who need to understand what's happening at different places in the world. and better understand the work itself. there's lot of information about the world whether its gravity, magnetic fields that we need understand to be able to use the technology that exists today. we help provide that. i think we all understand that without a a gps we would all be very lost. help in providing that is looking more specifically with understanding what's taking

place in different countries were we may not be able to other sources or we may not be able to have eyes around all the time. the overt constellation helps us do that so we try to make sure the decision-makers understand that on what's happening to answer the questions they have but also to provide the information they need which may be different than the questions they are asking. we want to help them understand the sensors that are out there, the capabilities that are out there to help them complete their missions. i started my career actually at the the and/or elsewhere on the interim exit here on this panel which is a great introduction to the intelligence community working with nga as a partner. i ended up here a couple years after that. i'll stop there. >> thanks, stacey. tina. >> tina harrington, director of signals acquisition as part of the inner row. i've been with in a row since 1993 which is hard to believe. i'm in a variety of positions, first as corporation and slopping over the government and

2006. our mission is basically everything from research and development, acquisition, operations, all about feeling and doing the right thing for intel and military research. we basically work very closely with our mission partners at nga and nsa, will also work very closely with air force making sure with the right partnershid were doing the right things on both sides. we are one of our lifeblood is innovation. one of things i love about what's happened in commercial space is it's letting us focus our technologies, things that are just unique to us, but in leveraging so much that is coming out of the commercial world. and the other piece that i find you some exciting watching from 199310 now, the whole space world, is a transition with the commercial now really stringing

more and more to life, it's how much more interest, new professionals coming out of school have in the space. and that's really driven by a lot of the commercial work that is being done. governments thought and it takes a long time. space kind of fell as part of that but now you see all these folks that say because of the new launch providers that we have, because of the commercial small satellite business, the ability to do things in schools and in universities has actually launched small satellites, that's been really driven by the commercial market. and the ability for us to take advantage of that market that's now coming out to help us feel the generation of professionals we need as we move forward. >> terrific, tina. a couple of questions coming out of those remarks already. >> thanks, tish and thanks to insa for hosting this form. i'm deputy commander for space command anchor space operator astronomical engineer and full

disclosure, two of my favorite sinus in my career were with the national reconnaissance office, so we have a common thread there. in case you haven't noticed, space as a war fighting debate has been a major theme international security circles here for several years now. and to invoke ricks french friend from casablanca, we are shocked, shocked to find the space in war fighting coming, right? actually truth i think we shouldn't be surprised. that might be the biggest thing to take with why is that? because space is critical for modern warfare and to modern society here and only increasingly so in so many different ways. and yet it is perceived by potential adversaries to be vulnerable. and so it's only logical and we should not be surprised that therefore our space could buildings with air force be threatened and that potential adversaries would develop capabilities to threaten those,

our space could but those that are so critical. so the big tech that we've been facing really within the national security arena but more focused at air force space command is how to make this shift to space as a war fighting domain? the big tectonic plates that you've all been watching i'm sure have been the standard of the united states space command, a new combatant command, really brings back the old united states space command but definitely not the same flavor. which by the way just was established last week in the rose garden ceremony at the white house, and we won't cinch the whole thing next monday in coral springs with the ceremony overseen by the chairman or general agreement will take the fight for the new united states space command. that brings its own challenges and its own right and intelligence support acumen will require and a bit has been a major priority for general raymond as he stands up this new combatant command. if they tectonic plate that we will know more about in a few weeks is space force, , that wod

be the organized train and equip arm, a service that would then supply the capabilities and the war fighters to you space command on the other combatant commands as necessary. and we've been looking really hard at what we think that would look like and how to set up a space force for success. but qaeda baby a little bit below the waterline that maybe hasn't got a lot of tension we can spend time on is hey, it's not just about the organization. what are the capabilities we need to develop? to protect and defend our space capabilities. and perhaps the most important thing is how do we grow the people to do that. and one component of that human capital piece is the intelligence type. we are going to have to go intelligence professionals for the space domain that support operational and foundational intelligence for potential war that exist in space here it's a major for us. i think i will leave you with in fact, i'll challenge you to think about this right now. when you think of space and

intelligence together, you might be like me, in my career i think about intelligence collection in space coming down to the earth. intelligence from space. we need to think really, really hard now about intelligence for space. where is that intelligence expertise, the processes, the capabilities we have to understand what's actually happening in the space environment to support general raymond in his capacity at united united states space command for potential work in space. a new kind of focus area for us moving forward. so look forward to the panel and the questions. >> general shock, but nicu something there. it's not a question but a comment. i'm really, really happy to hear you say that, coming from the operational side of the house. those of us who have been in intelligence profession are entire career, sometimes perfect intelligence is simply assumed. so it's nice to hear you say that you understand that we

don't know everything we need to know to support operations of space. so getting that signal, understand the requirements so those capable as can be built is very important. so thanks for that and we will probably come back to that. i'm going to start off with something that was kind of woven throughout all of your comments, if this this is a question forf you. this is a jump ball. all you can answer, some of you, but the stock and option for none of you. okay, so both the government and industry now have a wide range of capabilities, whether it's large, whether it's building small sets, space-based medication systems, analytics. there's a lot out there. and what i liked her from you is, what are the implications of an increasing democratization of space-based capabilities that allows any company or any

adversary to operate in space? so what are the challenges, what are the opportunities for us? >> it's exciting. i'll start with the good. all of the potential information that would be accessible on-demand anywhere around the world is very exciting. the creativity that's going to be needed to great the tools that will allow us to use this information, to be able to store more efficient with those are the things that are a little more daunting. so a lot of things were going to have to be watching and monitoring, and we know that we can't expand the number of people to be able to look at everything. so it's about really moving towards having that machine human teaming which provides a lot of other new challenges in the way we do things a great opportunity in the way that we will be able to allow some the more routines, some of the more

repetitive tasks to be done by machine so we can leave humans to do the more creative and critical thinking. that part is really exciting. in addition to the u.s. commercial and government, fibula to also leverage all the foreign partners, not only for their satellites and sensors but also for their analytics and for the product creation. there's a lot of opportunity out there to really not have to do everything ourselves anymore to really leverage those alliances. .. >> i look at what commercial is doing and lets us leverage -- my boss used a saying, we

should buy what we can and build what we must. governor dollars are always, no matter what it might look like, still limited and we want to focus on things that we and we alone need to do, not the things that others can do. obviously, adversaries are going to feel things. i would say put that in the other domain that we live in and work in. air domain adversaries do things. land domain adversaries do things. sea, cyber. space may be new to that domain, but we need to treat is the same as others, understand what adversaries are doing and we're not going to stop that, but how to get the intelligence for it like we've done the intelligence for all the other doe mains. >> let me -- so let me suggest an analogy that might help kind of reframe how we might look at

this because i sometimes think that gets framed as a government versus commercial or it's all about the -- are there places that are going to be friction points and such things and that could be true. i'm sure did i understand i'll let the historical ians give th right answer. i'm sure the british empire said look at the commerce that suddenly exploded around the globe, that's fueling the british economy, the world british economy. how did the british navy reacted to that, oh, how, what do we need to do, in the similar way with the space, how do we have the domain we haven't thought about it and all this. but i think there's some optimism like, hey, now the economics of the british empire of what we're doing in the maritime domain and look at that as a british navy.

at the same time and tina alluded to this, they're probably thinking what are the dutch and french doing and what are they learning about trafficking on the-- in the maritime domain that we don't know about that we need to catch up with because it could be a threat to our ability to maintain maritime superiority. and that's an analogy of how this kind of unfolds. the economic engines have been unleashed and i hope they're sustained, the key question, we'd want to leverage that the best from a government perspective and realize there are challenges associated with that and providing security in that environment, incentivizing further economic investment and also be prepared for new threats in that domain. >> that's by an air force officer, love the maritime analogy. >> on this panel important that i say leveraging opportunity is

important nor u.s. companies in particular for u.s. to maintain their strategic advantage in space. as u.s. companies have, in 2018. there was over $3 billion put into space technology companies and that money is essentially building a platform of not only the launch companies that you mentioned, but also, ground transport, data transport, space technology, that's enabling somebody to have the best and most capable space assets. it is my biased perspective and interest for u.s. companies to be seen as the best place to go to for their capabilities in order to maintain the streategic advantage and i feel it's inseparable when it comes to that technology in order to make sure that that technology is used in a--

in a way that's most beneficial. >> so let's follow on to that, chris. you know, necessary, inseparable, how is it going? and i'll again make it broader, you know, several of you talked about in particular the partnerships that have to occur between your two agencies between the air force and the other military services, with industry, with our allies. so how are we doing in developing those partnerships? do we have an architecture that easily ingests what industry has to offer, what our international partners have to offer and, you know, how are we doing between intel and ops? i mean, i'll just make it broad there. is it working? >> so-- start with you, chris. >> i'll say where it's working the best from my perspective,

from our space community, is that these small companies are being built from the ground up with interoperability and about internships in mind, built from the beginning with the hooks in place so they can talk to each other and leverage each other's parts of the value chain. i've also seen where the-- in the case of the u.s. government, there's been a lot of transparency about what needs exist. we've been pleased with how forth coming the government has been about what they want us to do. the signals that they're most interested in able to detect, for example. but i've also seen in other nations, luxembourg, a great example, where the governments have spent a lot of time directly investing in the companies and building up the industry, taking gambles on some of those companies. in the u.s. it's more the venture capital and industrial

base. you've seen with boeing acquiri acquiring millennium and raytheon and hawk eye. for them to take the role almost on behalf of the government to boost these new companies. in general the partnerships are working well. i think things could be done faster and bigger. >> faster and bigger. jt, tina? >> i would say that you mentioned the partnership with our allies. data sharing agreements in the geospacial arena. we have countries there are energy sharing, there are bilateral agreements and multilateral agreements and various regions are pooling data and allowing the region itself to benefit from the knowledge the individual countries are creating. so that part is looking great. with all of the different systems and i'm thankful there are many companies who are looking at the standards that

are out there to be able to create systems and products that will fit into infrastructures and architectures that already exist. the danger in having so many different vendors is that these things will not work together and we absolutely need them to be able to work together and to be able to ingest in systems that exist now and systems that will exist in the future. so, working well now, i think it will continue to work well, but we have to watch it. it's not guaranteed at that everything will come together if we don't partner and have the conversations and not force everyone to do things in a certain way and just know for people to ingest here, i need this level of understanding of your geolocation, i need this understanding of your resolution that will help us out. >> so i'm going to use our commercial that we stood up about two years ago, as the transition of the enhanced contract came over. that really, i will say

transitioned to how we were thinking within the nro, quite a bit. changed, well, before we did things more on our sat arm, our research and development arm, that looked at how maybe we could bring things in. we did kind of go all in at that point and really look at how did we use commercial to offset what i need to do with national test means. we've done-- now have done an initial set of different contacts there, looking at full production contracts in a year with commercial. we're trying to understand how we leverage that now over on-- i think the other piece that we-- i'm going to go to something stacy said earlier because i want to emphasize this as much as i love the spacecraft, which is where i spent most of my career, the ground the tc pad,

the interoperate operability. that's something we can't emphasize enough. when you look at the different platforms and things we're doing with the air force. the things that the air force is doing, we have to get the ground caught up to all of that. we need to be able to make use of all of this big data that's coming down, and we need to be able to do it in machines, not with humans. we need to move our humans off of being con top of every pixel that comes down and rather, only those things that need a human eye on it. and that's a major shift for all of us, and that is something that we really, really do need our industrial partners to help us with. i think the allied partnerships are still very well done and maintained. and then, i think, within the ic. i see us working better with both of our functional managers than i've seen in the past.

and a lot of that is driven by what's happening in the commercial markets. >> all right. this is where i deploy my role in bringing balance to the force here. >> everything you just heard, it was all good, it was. it was all about intel from space. everything-- every component and every piece of what you heard here on that, has a counterpart in intel force space. how do we understand what's going on in space? how do we harness partnerships with industry and with allies to get better space situational awareness and we're using the term now space domain awareness, it's bigger than space situation awareness. frankly in the same-- i know that spacey and nj struggle with the collation of what's happening in the terrestrial spheres, including in space, it's a data problem what's going on in space as well. it turns out space is pretty

big. huge. only getting bigger in many senses both from a cosmological and realize everything that we've said and the challenges with regard to init he will from space, commercial allies and such have a component in the intel force space arena. >> good point. so all of that data out there and you really are trying to leverage as much as you can from all of your partners. let's talk about the security and integrity of all of that data. as you're trying to deal with just the amount of it, how are you dealing with the security integrity of it and you know, what's at stake if we don't

secure that? so data assurance, and blends over obviously into mission assurance, and how do you mitigate the threats. >> do you want to go? >> industry can't sit here on a panel and say we want to interoperate fully with the u.s. government without also acknowledging the importance of cyber security and taking it seriously. there are absolute threats to space assets, government and commercial, and when you're essentially launching computers into orbit, you know, some of the same stress with your satellites as you have with your home pc or workplace server. so, there are standards in place that can be leveraged be beat-- both by government commercial. you can't dabble in security, we've been known to say. so, bringing on professionals who are able to implement and

enforce policy to protect systems, both on the ground and on orbit is essential to-- for any element of industry to be considered integral parts of the broader government solutions. >> i'm -- everyone is very happy to hear that, chris. and that's directly a couple of questions we've had from the audience. >> i agree. i think that companies need to acknowledge that everyone's a target for someone wanting your information and being able to come forward and proactively talk about the fact, what you're doing within cyber security will help us as a consumer in the capabilities that you're providing. it doesn't take us off the hook. we still also need to do our own checks so i'm hoping because of the information that's out there. data collected that we're going to have multiple data points to check things against. that's a simple way, taking a picture of the same place with

two cameras and they're different, then one of them is wrong. an easy way of looking at it. that's far too simple, but i'm hoping the amount much data out there is going to help us determine if something is manipulated. we have to be aware at that there are reasons that people not only want to put malware in the system. they want to not let us see what's out there. that's been there since we've been taking pictures of things and the idea of people manipulating the ideas themselves is a form of something that we have to acknowledge will be happening. we've seen a lot of it with de deep-- facial recognition and other technologies and we know that can be done and done really, really well. we can't pretend that that's not a threat and figure out ways to approach it. great ideas are definitely welcome in this particular environment. i think it's only going to get worse frankly. >> let me -- i'm going to flavor the discussion with a

question because i don't have the answer. as we've been looking at standing up the space force as a separate service, one of the question is what cyber professionals need to be a part of that space force, what knowledge, skills, abilities, core competencies are needed? we don't have the total answer, it's composite. there are a number of answers, one piece we always come back to is security and defense of our network that helps us operate our space capabilities. i'm fond of saying, cyber and security of best friends forever. >> we won't have the remote cutting a cutting edge without cyber assurance being a big component of that. >> i'm going to take it different as cyber, as an aircraft developer, supply chain is one of the biggest risk anymore. the amount of things that have

gone off shore. the number of things that we used to do in trusted foundries that are no longer available, that is-- we worry a lot about cyber, we worry about data integrity, but supply chain is one of those things that for us and making sure that the folks that we are counting on have the supply chain they need, and that folks that might used to build batteries thinking there's not a big business anymore are not staying in that business, that very much hurts us from the government perspective, and from that trusted and getting then the commercial folks that we would want in because we want to know that they've got a trusted supply chain as well. it's a different perspective, but it's something that really has, with the space going worldwide, some of those supply chains have not stayed within country or within one of our

allied countries and that's one of the things that from the securities perspective we look at very closely. >> which is why there is certainly much more of a focus by the department of defense on that. and we heard from suzanne white and a couple of the other folks yesterday on the various panels that there is a role focus on supply chain and securing the supply chain, so that's certainly a message to our industry partners here on where help is needed. you've mentioned this now a couple of times from different perspectives, first the intel support, too, and know you cyber and what does that look like. so, who is responsible for providing that intelligence to the new space command? and is that being developed and how would you assess it at this point? >> well, so, i think everybody. it's going to-- so i'll start with the obvious.

so, u.s.-- talking about the war fighter, u.s. space command, general raymond, one of his very first initiatives was to make sure we ingrained space command with the intel against community and i think it's off to a terrific start. and the next is at the center at shriver national space center. it's a vital component of the center and also of the command rit large. in fact, i think that we now have a j-2 and a deputy j-2 on station in cargo springs to help with the u.s. space command, the only complete team we kind of have. whether the 3 has a complete team and the 2 has a complete team, we're getting the other pieces there, that's from a war fighting perspective how that integration is coming together. so that's the war fighting

piece. on the development piece, i know general jamieson was here yesterday. i think she had a chance to talk about intel from and for space and about how we're growing space professionals. the air force actually really made huge changes in just a couple of years. it used to be our course for intel officers at good fellow that had that, a little bit of space flavoring to it, the space course was only two weeks long and it was space missiles and actually mostly about icbm's as recently as two years ago. under general jamieson's leadership, it ramped up last year to three weeks and mostly focused upon space and as of this year went to five weeks and i think it's only going to expand and specialize even further with the standup of a special space force and they have those that grow from second lieutenant to senior officer or on the enlisted side from one striper up to chief.

we'll have that within a space force. we're going to have-- we're starting to grow that and the ramp up has been huge and we're going to continue to grow. >> so do you think we need a national space intelligence agency? >> i think right now the-- so i am fond of saying that i think the real-- some of the best experts that we have in intel for space are at nasic wright-patterson and every time i go there, i'm wowed by the things that they understand and are doing. we just need to, i think, scale that up and it's mostly foundational and needs to translate into the operational intelligence support. so i think for the near to mid-term, it's going to be at nacic already. in the future it's possible there's a national space intelligence center.

>> you heard that here first. >> possible. [laughter] >> okay. talk about how you would deal with the threats to our space supremacy. >> so you -- it requires -- it's a team effort, right. we have to have capabilities to protect and defend, otherwise, vulnerable capabilities in orbit. you have to have, as i mentioned, the space domain awareness to understand what's going on and it can't be the tempo that operates at the speed of war and you have to be able to command and control the entire enterprise in a team and collective fashion. you know, when space-- when we were able to treat space as benign domain for a fairly brief period in our overall history i think is what we'd point to, you could operate independently, gps could operate completely

independent from missile warning and the only overlap would be just kind of basically efficiency of operation. we can't do that anymore. it has to be part of the complete integrated enterprise to protect everything we have in space and that's for part of that team. so, i think that that's what we're really focusing on. how do we do this from an enterprise and a command and control perspective that we've never had to do before. how do we integrate those operations and by the way, it's not just in the space domain, right? it has to inform what's happening in the terrestrial doe mains and combatant commanders as well. we're trying to put those in the right order and get the right answer. >> and join those that have been doing, continue to develop the tt p's that we need in order to work that problem set.

i think that the nsd is a critical portion of us getting in line to be able to have those sessions how those work. i think in this area is probably the closest i've seen the air force and nro work together. really regularing out what is each other's roles. how we work together. what things we take the lead on, what things they take the lead on. in either case whether it's a leader or follower, we're working together. we're not working at odds with each other. it's actually been a collaborative environment for us and i think that's critical to being able to stay ahead of the threat. >> absolutely critical. and as a citizen, that's exactly what we want to hear. >> the threats that originate from the ground and nga has a role in keeping an eye on those things and when they impact space. definitely a critical partnership with everyone. >> okay. let's shift back to some more focus on the commercial side of

things. private sectors investigating billions, when it comes to what they're doing in space capabilities. again, as i've said, from launch all the way through. and on the leading edge. how does this affect our national security space capabilities? and what i mean by that is will all of the talent and resources go -- not all, but predominant, are we seeing it shift, talent and resources going to profit-making activities versus national security? >> yeah, so, that's a great question. i don't think it's a zero sum game where the top talent has to choose between government or private sector. the win-win is when we bolster the talent base by getting people excited about space and i think we're doing a great job of providing exciting opportunities that have new

folks joining the work force, considering space, a, opportunity or the best opportunity to do something exciting. if i go to hawk eye employees and ask them what motivates them to come to work, they talk about having a purpose within a well-defined mission, first and foremost. and then they want to work with great people and work with exciting new technology. nothing i listed there is inherently industry, right? everything there is available in governments and industry and when governments and industry work together to produce exciting things, that bolsters the work force that we both get to enjoy. >> gets back to that partnering. so i'm going to go from my other hat that i wear, which is the lead for nro. nro never had a work force until now three and a half years ago, and so we are now, we always borrowed our work force with i is great for us. you bring people in and get new ideas in. and as of about two and a half

years ago, we stood up to the cadre and had the presence at the nro and the folks that stay there and we started going out and doing recruitment and other things, and we do find, again, i go back to because of the commercial, young people are really excited about space again and when we go to these recruitment activities, there are a lot of folks that are very interested in getting into the government side in space and it's really, it's that combination and i think the other piece that we all have to recognize is this generation is very different than when we grew up. where we want to go somewhere, nro since 1993, doesn't ebb and flo he both in and out of industry and government. and we need to be ready for that and how do we work that so it's good for their career and good for us. i mean, that's something that is a different model for us, but it's a reality in the model we now have to live in. >> i've been encouraged.

we had 300 interns this year between our various sites and the number of young people excited about intelligence community challenges, who come back multiple summers because we get them hooked on working on a really cool problem and they're like next summer i'm going to do this and next summer i'm going to do this and they convert to government. so there are some people who work in government mission and sacrifice the potential more money they could make somewhere else for the opportunity. i agree with tina, the future is more in and out and i think it's going to benefit industry and government. i'm excited about that, but it's a different model than we've work with. how do you bring them in and the types of speed as a government employee growing up and allow them to be successful and value the experiences which they've had which are different than some of their colleagues. it will take attention, but the opportunity there is great. >> and you hit on it, stacy,

how you enable folks to move back and forth and certainly, the mission is the draw from those in uniform, to government service, to private industry. >> and ng has a program that you deploy some of your folks into industry as wellments we do. i hope to see that expand going forward. it's a hard-fought opportunity to get. >> and we won't talk about the security clearance issue here. [laughter] >> that's something you want to add. >> observation and thought experience. observation not really new, we face this tension in the air force between hiring of the airlines and retaining personnel, that we've seen hugely in the cyber community already. and i do think, i agree with everything said here we've got to find ways to incentivize to move back and forth and to share. an experiment i'd throw up to you, and this is just--

imagine you get a call from the pentagon that says we want you to be the head of recruiting for the space force. are you optimistic about that job or pessimistic? i think i would be optimistic. i think that there are ways that -- and i think tina was alluding to that are that the younger folks would be excited about that. ways to tap into, hey, there are opportunities in commercial, but there are opportunities in the space force to do things no one has ever done before and to find new cutting edge things in space. that's a fun job to have. i'm not trying to poll particular for it, by the way. if you agree with me that that probably would be a fun job to have. i think that's optimistic about the talent we could bring in on the space side in the government in the future. >> so, are you actually laying the groundwork to transition to a space force? and are you ready if congress

passes this in a couple of weeks? >> so we have 20 minutes left. [laughter] >> the -- so we have definitely been on the air force side been doing some initial planning, assuming there would be a space force, why wouldn't we be? we're pretty sure it's coming we just don't know how aggressive that language is going to be in terms of time line and scope, but it's coming so we've been laying out the groundwork, laying out the problems, what does this mean? how do you attract a space force? i think that everybody is tracking it appears that if we have a space force it will be within the department of the air force much as the marine corps is in the department of the navy, it will start that way. the logical questions, if you had to white board it out, if you stand up a space force, what part of the broader air force does it leverage, rely on, what does it have to have in its own right that's independent and what does that

look like? really, i've been trying to layout the problems and analysis to answer those questions. recruiting is one of those, you wouldn't want to recruit for a space force. my own inclinations, we can go across the services in the nation, but i think there'd be enough interest in the space force and people who are comfortable with virtual recruitment, i think that's probably something we could do. frankly i think we could probably follow a model from our sister space agencies that are represented here as well as nasa in that regard. >> and a great question from the audience, will a purported space national guard be able to draw on private sector, private sector space expertise effectively? >> i do not see why we would not do that. that is the perfect vehicle to be doing that. general hyten, strategic

command tells an interesting story, if i get the details right, don't quote me quoting the general. he was going to silicon valley to visit one of the companies there or a military facility near one of those and an airman pulls up in a pretty expensive car, airman, how do you afford a car like that? >> i'm a reservist i actually work for google. my normal job, but i'm a reservist because i want to be a part of this and that's like the best example i can answer what you said. i absolutely, we would leverage that and that would be an advantage of the space guard, if there were a space guard. >> great. and really good questions from the audience, so please keep them coming. i'll put mine aside, these are better. here is a question about foreign sale. if the u.s. government wants to maintain u.s. space leadership, what are the nro, air force and

ic in general doing to enable u.s. private sector space companies to market and sell their capabilities to foreign partners and customers? foreign sales are critical to maintaining u.s. space company's competitive neness. >> and jay has a piece of this and chris, i'm sure you have a perspective. >> so hawk eye's entered uncharted territory for the product we're delivering to our customers, we are absolutely engaging with the right people in commerce that we're able to make the decisions when working with international customers. we've worked to enjoy a permissive regulatory environment that works for us and for the u.s. government. we are also first and foremost patriots and are ensuring that

as we think about the product that we're delivering that we have the nation's operational security in mind first and foremost. now that said, that wouldn't be the case with every member of industry so i think there needs to be consideration for how international sales are managed and we stand by the support. >> and i think at the end of the day we don't want to disadvantage u.s. industry. >> right. obviously, there are security concerns, but we don't want to disadvantage u.s. industry. >> agreed. if foreign capabilities -- you don't want to -- you want to be able to sell anything they can already get from others in their own countries or in other countries. the request he -- the question is how much better of a capability would you want them to be able to buy from a u.s. company than they can get on their own. i don't think any company wants to be the one whose image is used against u.s. forces somewhere else. so it really is a balance of

regulatory sort of policy. we don't always get it right and sometimes we're a little bit slow. we don't want to disadvantage americans companies, certainly true. so there's a lot of dialog to kind of figure out what is the right spot because the capabilities are changing so frequently, making sure we're always reviewing what restrictions we put in place and keeping up where technology is. >> so speaking of changing capabilities, much of the commercial mission has been associated with mapping foundation data. with the new source ins analytic capabilities availability, do-- this is not just for you st stacey, are there new suspicions to take on and if so, what may they be and partner-- >> we have a program called terraline which allows us to of

academia, industry, partner on what are i would say are intelligence problems, ones where there's so much commercial information available it doesn't make sense as nga as an intelligence agency to focus on. a couple of examples, north korea, their coal industry, and i think so in the arctic. there are things in the world we can leverage others, buying product services and analysis and not have to do it on our own bus there's so much information available and the capabilities that the industry are what we need. >> and i'll go back to our commercial that we stood up, the purpose of that is to understand commercial geo, and what we need to do in ntm. looking at what is the capability. what can they bring to bear and how do we integrate that within the greater mission rather than it being something that's just done for mapping.

so that's a big part of what they're looking at in the initial study phase going into the missile production phase. and it really is about how do we use them to help us form our world-wide picture for intelligen intelligence. >> i think i'll reference an example of that we've seen in the last decade that's been impressive that's escaped a lot of attention and that is the commercial satcom providers have amped up the game. it isn't simple transponder operations anymore. satcom's have various bandwidth needs and as they've managed the huge networks they've developed awareness that really we've been able, from the government side, we've been kind of lagging. understanding where need is, where potential unintentional interference is coming from, to geo locate that, to get that

from the equation, these are things we want to doen 0 -- do that on the government side and what's leveraging that same thing. >> so perhaps launch. there's a lot of capability that is being delivered today, being thought of, being developed, and is launch really keeping up and who should take launch to the next level? should it be the private sector? will it be the private sector? should it be the department of defense? should the intelligence community be pushing towards that? any thoughts there? >> i think it's a mixture of both. now, basically, we still very much for our named missions, rely on the air force to basically develop those and make sure it's meeting our very stringent requirements,

however, we also went off and did, let's call it -- refer to it as a tiny rocket contract a few years ago which allows us to go directly to commercial for some of those things that are not -- pass the type of system and i think a lot of that work has been pushed by the commercial companies wanting things in that price point and i think government should figure out when and how they can make use of that because we don't always have a class a system that i've got to have, the mo most stringent requirements. i have the variety and let's look at the variety to get into space. >> i think that the launching industry is probably the best of driving commercial for a number of these launch providers. you can go up there and print a list of 150 companies that claim mostly on power point that they're going to be launching rockets over the next few years. i've had the privilege of

visiting a dozen or so of these new launch providers and seeing what they're building and it's real technology built on a business plan, mostly for supporting-- supporting commercial launches and the new commercial constellations. what they're offering in this, you know, smaller class vehicle is responsiveness and the ability to choose the orbit you're getting into, which not only have commercial application, but is absolutely useful for responsive space for the government. so, i think anyone who has followed the launch discussion, from a national security attention. there's making sure that we're incentivizing innovation and a new way of doing business. one of general raymond's big pushing over the past year is revisioning the launch, the large launch facilities, space port of the future is what we have and been calling it to make sure it's keeping up with

demand as well as capability set and not being a rell of how we did things before. and also say continuing dialog within industry is important. next week i'll be chairing in colorado springs our twice a year consolidated launch schedule review board where we sit down the launches that are going to happen the next two to three years and industry attends those and we talk through, okay, how does this work? what are your demands? how are you seeing the schedule? how can we change the way we do operations? so continuing dialog is important. >> yesterday, we heard a fair amount about artificial intelligence, whether it's machine learning, deep learning, or you know, really getting all the way to full encompassing uses of artificial intelligence. can each of you talk about how you're incorporating ai, where you've seen strides made

already, what are some of the implications from a technology standpoint, from your work force and training standpoint, and where do you need help? >> jump ball. >> so we've got things all the way from our research group and as and t just looking at what is the art of the possible. how can i change? i keep talking big data because that is really what we now have with all of these sensors in space. so they're looking at always what they are to the possible, to then our ground division really looking at how do we implement today the more than machine learning and the big ai, the true ai of the long-term and we are seeing a lot of places that we can start taking a human out of the loop. they may still be on the loop, but not have to be the-- you know, every decision going

through a human because of that machine learning and we're looking to face-- and again, back in our research branch, what do i actually put in the vehicle, also, not just on the ground. so we're looking at it big, big push on the ground side, obviously, but it's all the way up into space. how do you take advantage of that and it's everything from what's that next cutting edge piece to what's available today, and i'll say probably one of the biggest things for us is that change in the work force again. so going from, you know, our primary folks that we would hire being engineers, and because it's all about building a spacecraft and some software, now it's about folks that know how to do that, but to do it for space. and that's a different skillset than we've had to build before and that's one of the things that we very much need industry to help us with, too, because

our historical industrial partners are not necessarily the ones that have that baseline. some of them do and some are growing it and some as chris mentioned are doing investments in other companies, and growing that in. that's a big area that really changes who we're looking to and how we need to look to, both for what we're going to hire internally, but who we're going to contract with. >> and tina's experience is completely mirrored on the industry side. we talk a lot about space, we talk a lot about our satellite at its core. half of our company is made up of software developers either working single processing or machine learning because ultimately as we've heard loud and clear we don't need more data, we need more information. so i think commercially to offer machine learning is something inherently

unclassified. it's commercial, it's shareable, but it is the machine learning on the commercial side as well that enables the delivery of that information. >> and stacey, where is nga in reading out nothing has changed? an analyst doing that versus the machine doing that so that your folks can really spend their time in what i'll call that upper right quadrant of searching for the unknown unknown. >> right, so we call it the aaa, so aai automation, augmentation. how do you take the people out of the loop and offer processes that are going to be thinking through. what is my intelligence question. if i see this, then i want to look for this. automating things automatically and getting us to a result, speed up that process. from the perspective of really

getting to ai, machine learning is -- there's a lot of potential with nga, there's a ton of data. data collected for entirely different purposes, not conditioned to be used right now and thrown into an algorithm to search for the unknown unknowns. so we have a decision to make how much time going backward to condition the date that we have to go forward and predict things versus making sure all the data we're getting now and going forward have ai. we're trying to find that balance. i see promise moving just beyond the known behaviors at a known location. i think that's the easiest thing we can do right now, there's a lot of automation there. getting to the point we're not sure what's happening or where it's happening, it will be a progression and machine learning helps us get in that direction. we've got some work to do and skill sets we need to bring in on the data architect side. in addition to those who understand learning.

we make some strides there and in data science and software development, but there are pieces of the puzzle that aren't quite yet in place that enable us to then move forward. >> a couple-- so, first an observation, i think probably some of the most impressive robots that we have ever built have been in the interplanetary explorers, it's not easy to land a rover on mars and then have to operate in mostly autonomous mode. that's kind of the past and that's interesting to look at that. when the space force stands up, it's going to be around for a long time and its ultimate destiny is going to be providing security and projecting power for increasingly vast distances from geo synchronous to lunar and beyond. all the means aside with fighters and everything, we're probably not doing that with humans in space anytime soon.

it's going to be done the way we've seen our exploration, it's going to be done with machines and it's going to be done, you know, at the speed of war. when you put all of those, again, terms together in the equation, i can't get to a solution that tells me that has to be done by cutting edge autonomy, intelligence and machine learning. so, again, space and cyber space, artificial intelligence, best friends forever. i think that's something we'll be pursuing and at the cutting edge for years to come. >> i think so as well. there have been a number of questions on agile acquisitions, why would industry continue to work with the government, all of the red tape, et cetera, et cetera. let me try and boil it down. chris, what are commercial industries biggest hurdles, red tape, et cetera, when dealing with the u.s. government? that's your question. for the rest of the panel, what are your agencies doing and

give me a couple of specifics, what are you doing to make it easier for commercial industry to work with you so that everyone is more effective in providing what the war fighter needs? >> sure. so first and foremost, if a company wants to play with the u.s. government they have to be sensitive to the fiscal time hines, ensuring that we are not an afterthought from a budget perspective, lest we get left behind through the budget cycles, those things are planned multiple years in advance. beyond that, as a small company some of the things we believe we play well in, are nearly impossible for us to prime or submit responses to given the level of effort associated with even putting together the documentation required for consideration, to that end we find partners, we find big

brothers to bring us an i lo n - to bring us along for those opportunities. >> are other transactional authorities being used and are they helping, ota mechanisms? >> we're looking at some of those opportunities and they're absolutely more promising than traditional techniques. i'll leave it at that. >> i kind of interrupted you, anything else? >> no, i think that's good. >> you're definitely looking what authorities we have such as ota's used more readily, broad announcements that we haven't used to make it easier for industry to interact with us. they're not as fast as people want us to go. but we look at our agency as well as the commission, but dni and acquisitional agility. more patience, we're trying to change. >> i would say be open to suggestions from your industry

partners. >> absolutely. >> so, i'm going to jump on the -- so we are trying to use more of the baa's quite a bit more than we used to. it used to be just our research and development arm that would use those, we're looking at how we can use those more in what i'll say the big -- rather than always just being for research and development that we can get out easier that way. we are looking at what things we can take advantage of from the ota, but also from some of the changes that they've done within the dni, for doing basically rd's, what they're called, basically much shorter timelines, have much quicker authorities to get through so we're looking at what are those things that are already out there that we can take a hold of and also understanding where the stumbling blocks still remain so we can bring those up as well. very much, yes, it's still going to have red tape. we're trying to figure out what

red tape we can get rid of or make sure it's not such a big hurdle. >> i'll just quickly mention two things that we're doing so that lieutenant general, jt thompson at the space and missile center has. he's really tried to reorient how s and c brings in nontraditional industry partners and he started something, most many of you are probably familiar with the space enterprise consortium, that i think has now exceeded 200 companies involved and centered on the ota mechanism to award contracts quickly and kickstart efforts. i'll mention that the air force has been doing a number of what we call pitch days, trying to bring in, again, innovative small companies to answer air force needs. there is a space centered air force pitch day planned for the f first week of november in san francisco and we're looking

forward to what comes of those students. >> i think there's excitement building around those. i think we're out of-- oh, big stop sign, we're out of time. thank you all so much. thanks for really actually answering the questions, and a big thanks to the audience for all the questions that you've forwarded. big round of applause. [applaus [applause] >> so i'm asking to ask our panel to hold on just a second here, we've got a couple of things and you all can get your final questions to them. thanks again to tisch and all of our panelists for a truly outstanding discussion. one more round of applause for them. [applaus [applause]. we're now going to take a 30-minute networking break, but i wanted to mention to you something special here, there was really a lot of energy in the exhibit hall yesterday and i know tish and i and bob and

ray and bob shea spent a lot of time walking around to the exhibits and we're getting a lot of positive feedback from folks about the interaction they were having with you, that reflects the innovative ideas our industry and academic partners bring to the national security mission. a number of exhibitors have reupped for next year's summit. if your company would like to secure your spot visit the 2020 space selection desk in the exhibit hall, in the maryland foy. enjoy the networking break. remember, the breakout sessions begin promptly at 10:20 a.m. enjoy the break. [applaus [applause]. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> this intelligence and national security conference taking a break at the national harbor in maryland. more live coverage coming up

later today at 12:30 eastern when we bring you a discussion on defending cyber space. this moderated by new york times reporter david sanger. we'll hear from senior military leaders, law enforcement, and homeland security officials again at 12:30. later a conversation on strategic threats and national collection priorities. this coming saturday we'll have coverage. new hampshire democratic party convention all of the 2020 democratic presidential candidates are expected to be there. you can watch it live from manchester beginning at 9 a.m. eastern on c-span and also follow our coverage on-line at c-span.org or listen with the free c-span radio app. this weekend on american history tv, saturday at 8 p.m. on lectures in history. the california gold rush and the environment at 10:00 on real america, the 1977 film on italian newspaper journalist

marino demenicci. and the u.s. policy toward iran and iran as nuclear program and historian talks about are we there yet. the american past, present and driverless. explore history every weekend on c-span 3. >> this is the story of how this whole new economy was built and how i've always been really interested, ever since i was working in washington in how business and government interact with one another. they have an antagonistic relationship and -- and the history of america is public-private partnerships in many ways that sometimes are unseen and i think this story is a really great way to get into that.

>> university of washington history professor margaret o'mara discusses her book, the cove, silicon valley and remaking of america, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q & a. . >> what is your vision in 2020? they're asking what issue to you most want to see the presidential candidates address during the campaign? student cam is c-span's documentary competition for high school student. with 1 cash prizes at stake, including a $5,000 grand prize. students are asked to produce a short video documentary, include c-span video and reflect differing points of view. information to help you get started is on our website. student cam.org. >> and now, political observers give their assessment of the