Count of 10

Another round?

In boxing, when a fighter is knocked down, the referee begins the countdown. If the fighter cannot get back up by 10, he loses.

So where is the US?

Trump says the US is still dancing around the ring. Most of the world sees the US down and staggering to its feet around the count of 4 or 5. It can still punch but it is shakey .

The trouble with US capitalism is that it is monopoly capitalism - in contrast, with China, which is, one might say “perversely” free market capitalism. As the economist Arrighi writes in “Adam Smith in Beijing”

The US ends up making things that are technologically complex, with lots of bells and whistles, not necessarily practical but incorporating all the latest gizmos whether they work or not—always too complicated.

It then tries to ban competitors or otherwise force buyers to accept its products. You have to pay a lot to learn how to use these things— if, in fact, you can use them at all - -which is not guaranteed.

A good example is the F35, the most expensive fighter in history that still doesn’t work half the the time, despite years of development and costly fixes. It can be flown only under the right conditions which are not always found in wars. .

If I understand Foo correctly, the US is trying to weaponize AIs as “closed weight models” just like it weaponizes the dollar or tariffs to achieve control over other countries—but it can only do that if those countries have no choice in the matter . If they do have choice, they can buy Chinese models and adapt them to their specific needs. That’s because the Chinese favor “open weight” models.

The problem for the US is the degree to which AI development has been financialized. As I have said before, the AI Bubble is unsustainable . It requires total economic hegemony, cheaper energy that is unavailable and a petrodollar that no longer exists/,

Of course, the dollar as a main reserve currency - no longer THE “reserve currency” but a ”main one”. Still, the most important one — but competitors are catching up.

As I said last time, the US does little with much, but the wave of the future is doing much with little.

Proprietary hi-tech is not the answer

In my last post I gave an example of how Iran used ancient F5s that should have been in a museum to do some really effective damage to US bases.

The US, by contrast, was throwing its most advanced weaponry at Iran, using AI for precision — a total failure.

It famously led to the slaughter of over 120 young girls and others, as the result of an AI system “error”. That was a proprietary model —the Maven Smart System. And Minab was not the only “mistake”.

US targeting used AI to destroy a lot of

• painted images of helicopters and fighter jets at various airfields. .

• mockups and decoys resembling tanks, aircraft, and missile launchers.

These things confused the automated computer-vision algorithms used by systems like Project Maven.

Who to blame?

• Contractor: Palantir Technologies.

• Anthropic’s closed weight Claude AI: used to semi-autonomously rank target priorities and automatically draft legal justifications for the strikes

• Cost: $1.3 billion

Open-weight AIs emphasize adaptability and simplicity compared to closed weight systems. That does NOT mean that they do not have weaknesses, but they are easier to fix, since they are nonproprietary.

In the case of “closed weight” AIs, access to their source code, underlying weights, and architecture are restricted, so users cannot easily modify, audit, or customize them to meet unique or rapidly shifting needs —as in a war.

It is perhaps a poor comparison.

But “open weight” is to “closed weight” rather like Linux is to Windows.

This shows Iranian strikes on Camp Buehring. These are high precision missile and drone strikes (CEP 5 m)

The strike pattern appears precise rather than random, indicating the selective targeting of high-value infrastructure clusters essential to the camp’s operational mission.

Among the most significant damage visible in satellite imagery is the heavily burned electrical substation, showing extensive scorching, blackened equipment, destroyed transformer banks, and substantial debris. Damage to electrical infrastructure can have cascading operational effects, disrupting power supply across large sections of the installation and degrading multiple support functions simultaneously.

Containerized housing units and modular troop accommodations also display localized burn damage, with several structures destroyed. Nearby rectangular buildings consistent with warehouses, maintenance facilities, and logistics storage complexes exhibit roof collapses, extensive burn marks, and structural damage.

The targeting philosophy appears clear: rather than attempting to destroy the entire base or inflict maximum personnel casualties, the strikes seem intended to degrade logistics throughput, maintenance capacity, electrical support systems, supply handling, troop accommodation, and staging operations.

For a logistics hub such as Camp Buehring, impairing these functions can significantly reduce operational effectiveness even if much of the physical infrastructure remains standing.

This kind of selective attack requires good ISR but also careful human analysis and judgment.

In the end (forgive me, please) you get more bang for the buck.

Support New Forensics.

Help Ichi and Chappy and Julian, whose soul they rescued , by buying us coffee at https://buymeacoffee.com/julicow/

And please encourage others to subscribe to News Forensics. I would love to get to 5000 subscribers.