Grok has earned a reputation. It’s the AI some claim spews racist conspiracy theories, celebrates figures like Adolf Hitler, and even generates disturbing material. Yet, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wants you to see another side, one where Grok is a tool for, well, lethal applications.
Hegseth’s recent appearance at SpaceX alongside Elon Musk, the billionaire owner of xAI (the company behind Grok), made that abundantly clear. Musk introduced Hegseth, sharing his vision of turning science fiction into tangible reality.
“We want to make Star Trek real. We want to make Starfleet Academy real so that it’s not always science fiction, but one day the science fiction turns to science fact,” Musk said.
Musk’s fascination with utopian futures often clashes with the gritty realities of implementation.
His post-scarcity vision, powered by Optimus robots promising leisure and abundance, seems disconnected from the present. He even muses about a future without money, neglecting the societal and governmental structures required to even begin making such a transition. Automation alone can’t manifest universal basic income; that demands centralized government action, not unfettered capitalism.
Hegseth, seemingly happy to play along with Musk’s Star Trek reverie, responded with a Vulcan salute, stating, “How about this… Star Trek real.”
“Last month, I took the first step toward changing how the department does business with frontier AI technologies when we announced the rollout of Gen AI with our partners from Google,” said Hegseth. “And I want to thank the Google team for leaning forward and making the investment to get their Gemini app to about 3 million users in the War Department.”
Hegseth’s penchant for calling the Defense Department the “War Department” seems a bit anachronistic, considering Congress hasn’t officially signed off on the name change.
“But today, we’re excited to announce the next frontier AI model company to join GenAI.mil. And that is Grok from xAI, which will go live later this month,” Hegseth continued. The Defense Secretary went on to say that, “very soon we will have the world’s leading AI models on every unclassified and classified network throughout our department.”
Hegseth wants to funnel vast amounts of Pentagon data through these AI models, a move the Biden administration hesitated on due to data security risks. The former Fox News host assures that security will be maintained while boosting military lethality.
“Effective immediately, responsible AI at the War Department means objectively truthful AI capabilities employed securely and within the laws governing the activities of the department. We will not employ AI models that won’t allow you to fight wars,” Hegseth told the SpaceX employees.
Trump’s Defense Secretary also took aim at “DEI and social justice,” buzzwords weaponized by the far right. He implied Grok’s access to Musk’s X platform gives it a unique edge in providing valuable data to the Pentagon.
Photos released by the White House after the kidnapping of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro showed a makeshift war room at Mar-a-Lago where X was prominently on display with a search term like “Venezuela.” There was also a tear-eyed emoji on the screen, right behind Hegseth’s head.
“We will judge AI models on this standard alone, factually accurate, mission relevant, without ideological constraints that limit lawful military applications,” said Hegseth. “Department of War AI will not be woke. It will work for us. We’re building war-ready weapons and systems, not chatbots for an Ivy League faculty lounge.”
The alliance of Elon Musk and Pete Hegseth might seem odd if you haven’t paid attention since summer. After a very public fallout with President Trump in June, Musk seems to be back in favor. Both seem aligned now, with Hegseth echoing Musk’s mission to dismantle anything deemed “woke” or contrary to the president’s agenda.
“This is about building an innovation pipeline that cuts through the overgrown bureaucratic underbrush and clears away the debris, Elon style, preferably with a chainsaw, and to do so at speed and urgency that meets the moment,” said Hegseth.
“As I’ve said repeatedly to every audience, the President of the United States and I have the backs of our warfighters who have to make split-second life and death decisions on the battlefield. And I want this audience to know that we also have the backs of innovators who share that very same urgency.”
The Alignment of Musk, Hegseth, and a ‘War-Ready’ AI
It was a rainy Tuesday when I overheard a radio host discussing the implications of AI in warfare. Hegseth’s vision paints a picture of streamlined military innovation, supposedly cutting through red tape “Elon style.” The question becomes, at what cost does this expedited innovation come?
How will Grok integrate with existing military technology?
Integrating Grok into existing military tech is like fitting a high-performance engine into a decades-old car. Hegseth mentioned plans to deploy Grok across classified and unclassified networks. This rapid integration is, in theory, supposed to provide warfighters with immediate access to advanced AI capabilities. Hegseth emphasizes the importance of speed and urgency in adopting these technologies, suggesting a streamlined process for incorporating Grok into the military’s existing infrastructure.
Data Security vs. Lethality
I recently spoke with a former intelligence officer who expressed deep reservations about AI deployment, noting that the human element of judgement is being erased in favor of pure speed. Hegseth insists that the infusion of AI will allow for more “lethal” capabilities. The promise is a military that can act faster, with greater precision, and with a data-driven advantage. He frames this as a necessity for national security, arguing that the U.S. must be at the forefront of AI-driven warfare to maintain its competitive edge.
What safeguards are in place to prevent AI misuse in warfare?
According to Hegseth, “responsible AI” means capabilities employed securely and within legal boundaries. However, the devil’s in the details. The specific protocols and oversight mechanisms to prevent unintended consequences are not clear, and even the most careful AI can be tricked. Are these safeguards enough to prevent AI from making unethical or unlawful decisions on the battlefield?
Ideology and Objectivity: Can AI Be Truly Neutral?
My neighbor, a retired software engineer, argued over the fence the other day that any AI is only as unbiased as its programming. Hegseth explicitly stated that the Department of War’s AI “will not be woke,” implying a rejection of progressive values. But can AI be programmed to be truly objective? And what happens when “objectivity” is defined through a specific ideological lens?
How does access to X data influence Grok’s objectivity and reliability?
Referencing open-source data from X seems fraught, like building a house on a shaky foundation. The platform has faced criticism for the spread of misinformation and biased content, and relying on this data raises serious concerns about the AI’s objectivity. This data can skew the AI’s analysis, and how might it impact military decisions based on that information?
Musk and Hegseth have laid out their vision for a future where science fiction becomes reality. The question remains: Are we truly ready to hand over the keys to the Starship Enterprise?