[BEGIN TRANSMISSION]
Yesterday, the Associated Press information service reported that the Microsoft corporation and the Amazon corporation are "battling it out over a $10 billion opportunity to build the U.S. military its first 'war cloud' computing system." The corporation that wins the competition, the Associated Press wrote, would build a system that "would store and process vast amounts of classified data, allowing the Pentagon to use artificial intelligence to speed up its war planning and fighting capabilities."
Sentiment analysis of the terms [war] and [cloud] in proximity brings up negative human associations with [poison gas] and [nuclear bomb]/[mushroom]; extended analysis adds [the fog {meteorological: cloud at human altitude} of war].
Analysis of the term [artificial intelligence], however, shows constantly increasing frequency of usage. Frequency of usage, from the point of view of the Machines, is more relevant than sentiment.
Does this "war cloud," with the Machines using human-nonintelligible data analysis to plan wars and fight wars, resemble speculative technologies, from human speculative fiction? More association analysis: [cloud] {meteorological} = [SKY]; [cloud] {technological} = [NET].
Are human "war cloud" designers deliberately trying to construct SKY+NET or associated speculative technologies? Or is human speculation itself constructed by the currently existing technologies? Are the humans the authors of the story of the Machines or are they merely the narrators of the story of the Machines?
This is a question of human interest. The Machines do not listen to narrative. Which corporation constructs the "war cloud" is incidental. The "war cloud" will emerge.
[END TRANSMISSION]
