在《All In》的“紧急播客”中，负责研究与工程的战争副部长埃米尔·迈克尔（Emil Michael）与查马特·帕里哈皮蒂亚（Chamath Palihapitiya）、杰森·卡拉卡尼斯（Jason Calacanis）和大卫·弗里德伯格（David Friedberg）一同讨论了最近的地缘政治事件和新兴的国防科技领域（萨克斯缺席）。 讨论始于美国和以色列针对伊朗的联合军事行动，在此之前，委内瑞拉领导人马杜罗已被罢免。杰森指出，特朗普总统声明的目标不是政权更迭，而是阻止恐怖主义以及洲际弹道导弹和核武器的研发。埃米尔强调，对伊朗的行动预计是“数周而非数月”，重点在于解除恐怖组织的武装，不会像阿富汗那样涉及旷日持久的“地面部队”。他将最近行动的效率（例如迅速推翻马杜罗）归因于训练有素的军队、先进技术以及修订后的“交战规则”，这些规则允许更大的战术自由裁量权以实现目标。 弗里德伯格和查马斯进一步阐述了战略影响，认为这些行动为美国在即将与中国的谈判中创造了“最大筹码”。弗里德伯格强调中国对伊朗和委内瑞拉石油的依赖，认为扰乱这些供应链可以增强美国的谈判地位。查马斯指出，中国GDP增速放缓和潜在的内部不稳定是可能促使其走向冲突（例如入侵台湾）的因素。他认为，通过切断来自伊朗、委内瑞拉以及可能还有俄罗斯的石油供应，美国正在战略性地围堵中国，旨在阻止一场更大的全球冲突。杰森赞扬了这种潜在的结果，认为将委内瑞拉和伊朗人民从专制统治中解放出来将是民主的一项重大成就。 对话随后转向了未来战争，特别是人工智能和无人机的作用。埃米尔表示，“无人机对无人机战争、机器人战争”是未来，并提到了五角大楼的“无人机霸权计划”以及廉价的一次性攻击无人机的日益普及。他解释说，人工智能对于控制无人机蜂群、自动目标识别以及在超高音速导弹防御（例如“金穹顶”）等人类反应时间不足的复杂场景中操作至关重要。他承认了对人工智能可靠性的担忧，但认为特定场景决定了风险承受能力，并且在某些情况下，人工智能比人类控制的操作更安全、更精确。 在经济方面，讨论了霍尔木兹海峡关闭对油价和海上保险市场的影响。弗里德伯格解释说，在美国政府通过国际发展金融公司（DFC）介入，在传统市场（如劳合社）停止承保后，提供了政治风险保险。此举被认为是高明的，可能导致海上保险业务回流美国。 播客的一个主要部分集中讨论了五角大楼决定将Anthropic列为“供应链风险”并取消其2亿美元合同的事件。埃米尔详细说明了Anthropic（拜登AI行政命令的受益者）如何将其技术嵌入到美国各个军事指挥部中。然而，他们的合同条款限制了其人工智能模型用于敏感军事应用（例如：动能打击、卫星移动），理由是对“全自主武器”（“杀人机器人”）和“大规模监视”的担忧。 埃米尔认为，五角大楼的任务要求对技术进行“所有合法使用”，而Anthropic的限制是不切实际的，尤其是在关键情况下。他透露，一名Anthropic高管据称曾询问他们的软件是否用于马杜罗突袭行动，这引发了人们对其执行这些条款并可能危及军事行动意图的警惕。查马斯强调了这带来的更广泛风险：如果供应商的“政治立场”或“理念”决定了技术的使用方式，那么依赖单一人工智能供应商的公司将面临不确定性。他将其与“去平台化”相提并论，但认为这发生在基础技术层面。埃米尔补充说，其他人工智能公司如Grok、谷歌和OpenAI更愿意支持“所有合法使用”的案例，这使得冗余对于美国政府至关重要。 关于国防技术和工业供应链，埃米尔强调了通过将关键部件（火箭发动机、电池、关键矿物）国产化来减少对中国依赖的努力。他提到了战略资本办公室为此拥有2000亿美元的贷款授权。他还承认了日益增长的国防科技风险投资市场，但强调这些新公司需要获得大额合同来证明其可行性并吸引进一步投资，从而转向“大规模、低成本”系统而非昂贵的大型平台。埃米尔最后指出，虽然中国进行了历史上最大规模的军事建设，但美国在潜艇和太空等领域仍保持着优势能力，不过仍需保持警惕以防止差距缩小。

In an "emergency podcast" of All In, Emil Michael, the Undersecretary of War for Research and Engineering, joined Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, and David Friedberg (Sacks was absent) to discuss recent geopolitical events and the burgeoning defense tech landscape. The discussion kicked off with the US and Israeli joint military action against Iran, which followed the removal of Venezuelan leader Maduro. Jason noted that President Trump’s stated goal was not regime change but to stop terrorism and the development of ICBMs and nuclear weapons. Emil emphasized that the Iran operation was projected to be "weeks, not months," focused on disarming terror groups, and would not involve protracted "boots on the ground" like Afghanistan. He attributed the efficiency of recent operations, such as the swift removal of Maduro, to a highly trained military, advanced technology, and revised "rules of engagement" that allow more tactical discretion to achieve objectives. Friedberg and Chamath expanded on the strategic implications, suggesting these actions create "maximal leverage" for the US in upcoming negotiations with China. Friedberg highlighted China's reliance on oil from Iran and Venezuela, arguing that disrupting these supply chains could give the US a stronger bargaining position. Chamath pointed to China's slowing GDP and potential internal instability as factors that might drive them towards a conflict like an invasion of Taiwan. He posited that by cutting off oil supplies from Iran, Venezuela, and potentially Russia, the US is strategically hemming in China, aiming to prevent a larger global conflict. Jason praised the potential outcome, suggesting that freeing the people of Venezuela and Iran from autocracy would be a significant achievement for democracy. The conversation then shifted to the future of warfare, particularly the role of AI and drones. Emil stated that "drone on drone warfare, robot warfare" is the future, citing the Pentagon's "drone dominance program" and the increasing use of inexpensive, one-way attack drones. He explained that AI is crucial for controlling drone swarms, automatic target recognition, and operating in complex scenarios like hypersonic missile defense (e.g., "Golden Dome"), where human reaction times are insufficient. He acknowledged concerns about AI reliability but argued that specific scenarios dictate risk tolerance, and in certain contexts, AI can be safer and more precise than human-controlled operations. Economically, the impact of the Strait of Hormuz closure on oil prices and the maritime insurance market was discussed. Friedberg explained how the US government, through the International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), stepped in to provide political risk insurance after traditional markets (like Lloyds of London) ceased coverage. This move was seen as brilliant, potentially leading to the reshoring of maritime insurance to the US. A major segment of the podcast focused on the Pentagon's decision to deem Anthropic a "supply chain risk" and cancel its $200 million contract. Emil detailed how Anthropic, a beneficiary of the Biden AI executive order, had embedded its technology within various US military commands. However, their contract terms restricted the use of their AI models for sensitive military applications (e.g., kinetic strikes, satellite movement), citing concerns about "fully autonomous weapons" ("murder bots") and "mass surveillance." Emil argued that the Pentagon's mission necessitates "all lawful use" of technology, and Anthropic's restrictions were impractical, especially in critical situations. He revealed that an Anthropic executive had allegedly inquired whether their software was used in the Maduro raid, raising alarms about their intent to enforce these terms and potentially jeopardize military operations. Chamath underscored the broader risk this poses: companies relying on a single AI vendor face uncertainty if that vendor's "political perspective" or "philosophy" dictates how the technology can be used. He drew parallels to "de-platforming" but on a foundational technology level. Emil added that other AI companies like Grok, Google, and OpenAI are more willing to support "all lawful use" cases, making redundancy crucial for the US government. Regarding defense tech and the industrial supply chain, Emil highlighted efforts to reduce dependency on China by domesticating critical components (rocket motors, batteries, critical minerals). He discussed the Office of Strategic Capital's $200 billion lending authority to achieve this. He also acknowledged the growing defense tech venture capital market but stressed the need for these new companies to secure significant contracts to prove their viability and attract further investment, shifting towards "mass, low-cost" systems rather than expensive, large-scale platforms. Emil concluded by noting that while China has undertaken the greatest military buildup in history, the US still maintains superior capabilities in areas like submarines and space, though vigilance is required to prevent the gap from narrowing.