Quantum computing enables researchers to solve problems that were previously impossible to solve, and its use is on the rise. In 2022, Crystal Noel joined Duke University as an assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering and physics. Noel brought her expertise as well as the Error-corrected Universal Reconfigurable Ion-trap Quantum Archetype (EURIQA), an advanced quantum computer system funded by the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Agency (IARPA), along with her to the Duke Quantum Center.
“The EURIQA system is currently the only one of its kind. It is the most powerful academic quantum computer available. This system could not have been built on this scale without the sustained commitment from IARPA.” – Crystal Noel
Collectively, members of the Duke Quantum Center have brought in over $170 million in funding and performed over $100 million in government contracts since 2007. Noel specializes in quantum error correction, adding to the Duke Quantum Center’s rapidly growing knowledge base.
Drawing on her research, Noel answered several questions regarding her experiences in quantum computing, the value of federal funding, and provided advice for students interested in studying quantum computing:
What inspired you to study quantum computing?
My initial inspiration to study quantum computing came from my background in both computer science and physics. I enjoy the applications and utility of computer science, but physics captured my imagination. Quantum computing combines the two topics into a field of its own.
What’s a common misconception about quantum computing that you come across in your work?
A common misunderstanding about quantum computing is that the power comes from creating superpositions of states, thereby allowing parallel processing of a problem on all possible inputs at once. While this property is important, it is not enough. When a quantum system is measured, it collapses onto a single state, making it impossible to get all the answers from all the inputs in one measurement. The real promise of the power of quantum computing comes from quantum interference and entanglement, which are quantum properties that are much harder to grasp. Even Einstein called entanglement “spooky action at a distance.”
What is unique about the Error-corrected Universal Reconfigurable Ion-trap Quantum Archetype (EURIQA) and how has funding from IARPA assisted your work?
The EURIQA system is currently the only one of its kind. It is the most powerful academic quantum computer available. This system could not have been built on this scale without the sustained commitment from IARPA, as well as the ambitious goals of the IARPA LogiQ program to push towards an extremely capable device.
What are you looking forward to most in your time in Durham and working at the Duke Quantum Center?
One thing that I have really enjoyed about working on the EURIQA system is collaborating closely with theorists to bring their ideas to reality. I am looking forward to the development of the Duke Quantum Center into a user facility with multiple systems running a diverse array of applications. I hope that we have theorists visiting from all over the world to work with us to study problems in physics, chemistry, or even biology.
What would you like to tell current students who are interested in quantum?
There are many ways to contribute to the quantum community – science writing, software development, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, quantum physics, algorithms, and more. With the industry and research growing so fast, there is a need for all types of folks to jump in and keep quantum moving. Try to read about the current research and find what problems you find exciting to tackle. It’s an exciting time for quantum, so come and join us!
As we enter the new year, there are certainly many issues of interest to the Duke community that the federal government has on its to-do list. In the last several months of 2021, Congress and the Biden administration juggled several major pieces of legislation, from infrastructure to the debt ceiling. Below is a roundup of the recent highlights from Washington and a preview of the coming months that are most relevant to the Duke community:
FY22 Budget & Appropriations
In December, Congress narrowly avoided a potential government shutdown by passing another stopgap to extend the deadline for passing the FY22 appropriations bills until February 18. Lawmakers are spending the next several weeks continuing negotiations in hopes of reaching a final agreement by the new deadline. The release of the FY23 President’s Budget Request is also expected to be delayed until March. Below is a table illustrating the current status of Duke’s FY 22 appropriations priorities.
Status of Duke University Funding Priorities in the Federal Budget Process
In the last few weeks of 2021 Congress successfully passed the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act and a $2.5 trillion increase to the national debt ceiling to avoid default before 2023. As Congress returns from recess, its focus will be directed back towards the Build Back Better Act (BBB). The Association of American Universities (AAU), shared an analysis of the bill that passed the House, which is is expected to change dramatically if it successfully passes through the Senate. Duke’s priorities for the package include federal research funding, doubling the maximum Pell Grant, providing a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients and various tax provisions (see below for specifics).
Research and Innovation
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) created two new divisions for climate & environment and energy last fall. These divisions are both aimed at using science-based approaches to address the climate crisis, reducing emissions and more.
In November, the ASTRO2020 Decadal Survey was released outlining the scientific goals over the next 10 years for astronomy and astrophysics.
Authorization Bills
National Defense Authorization Act
President Biden signed the $780 billion FY22 NDAA into law on December 27. The massive package includes several provisions relevant to higher education and research communities including a boost to cyber capabilities as well as almost a 25 percent increase to R&D funding defense wide. Additionally, the bill incorporates recommendations from the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence and will designate funding to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs).
Competitiveness Legislation
After a flurry of activity during the summer, progress on various innovation and competitiveness measures stalled for most of the fall. In November, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) agreed to take the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) to conference. The House is now expected to pass a broader omnibus measure that would contain its stand-alone bills, including the NSF for the Future Act and DOE for the Future Act, to create a more cohesive conference between the upper and lower chambers.
Foreign Influence and Research Security
The House Intelligence Committee passed its annual authorization bill which included a provision that would give the Department of Defense authority to establish a pilot program to vet individuals working on unclassified research projects who wouldn’t already be subject to Federal vetting procedures. This provision was attached to the House version of the National Defense Authorization Act, but was removed during final conference negotiations. The Senate Intelligence Authorization Act does not include a similar proposal.
DARPA announced its Countering Foreign Influence Program has created a new risk assessment rubric for all proposed Senior/Key Personnel selected for negotiations of fundamental research grants or cooperative agreements. This assessment would run separate from and after the scientific review process and adjudicated prior final award.
NSF announced it is creating a new system of records – NSF-77 Data Analytics Application Suite. This system will allow NSF to compare and analyze information reported by grantees and enable it to “uphold the scientific community’s core values of openness, transparency, honesty, equity, fair competition, and objectivity.” Among other things, it will be used enforce NSF’s disclosure requirements and help implement National Security Presidential Memorandum-33 guidance.
Previously expected last fall, OSTP recently released guidance for federal agencies regarding the implementation of National Security Presidential Memorandum-33 (NSPM-33). The new guidance includes several important provisions, including establishing standardized disclosure requirements; enabling researchers to use standardized reporting tools; creating guidelines for determining consequences for violations; information sharing between federal agencies; and ensuring that agencies implement NSPM-33 “in a nondiscriminatory manner.” The guidance also provides a definition of “foreign government-sponsored talent recruitment programs.”
Higher Education & Student Aid
Duke and the higher education community advocated for doubling the maximum Pell grant this year. The #DoublePell campaign was established to encourage bipartisan support among members of Congress to increase funding. There are proposed raises for the Pell grant in both the Build Back Better (BBB) Act and FY22 funding legislation, that fall short of the doubing goal.
As has been reported by numerous media outlets, in April, the Biden administration plans to unveil major education civil rights proposals that aim to reverse many of the previous administration’s rules on sexual misconduct and create new protections for transgender students.
Immigration
On November 29, Duke sent a letter to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Division of Humanitarian Services Office of Policy and Strategy Acting Chief Andria Strano Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). The letter emphasized, “We hope that any changes that emerge through this rulemaking will focus on the enormous benefits of allowing full participation in society and higher education by current DACA students or employees, individuals who can now apply for DACA to enroll in or work for Duke, and by other similarly situated undocumented persons.”
Additionally, the State Department published a proposed rule to raise application fees for several nonimmigrant visa categories, including F, M, and J. Duke continues to work with the higher education associations on a response to these fee increases.
Tax
The BBB contains several higher education tax provisions of interest to higher education and Duke. The proposed bill remedies the tax treatment of Pell Grants, increases incentives for charitable giving, and addresses university concerns with the tax on schools’ investment income.
Biden Administration
Throughout the past several months, more individuals have been confirmed by Congress to take up their appointed positions in the Biden administration. The Office of Government Relations has an up-to-date tracker that highlights positions of most relevance to Duke, which you can access here.
Updates From Duke in DC/OGR
In Fall 2021, we saw a strong return to in-person events and campus visits, as well as a new introduction to hybrid events. On campus, Duke welcomed visits by the Chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff, General Mark Milley, the director of the Army Research Office, and innovation leaders from the 18th Airborne during the final months of 2021.
In December, Duke Sanford School of Public Policy Fellow and Duke alum, Justin Sherman T’20, gave expert testimony at a Senate Committee on Finance Subcommittee on Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Growth hearing on “Promoting Competition, Growth, and Privacy Protection in the Technology Sector.”
In our North Carolina delegation, both Representatives David Price (D-NC) and G.K. Butterfield (D-NC) announced their retirements in the fall which, in addition to Senator Burr’s previously announced retirement and the addition of a new congressional district, will lead to big changes in the upcoming 118th Congress. Both Rep. Price and Butterfield have represented Duke University in the past. Our office is also paying attention to new congressional maps and midterm elections in the year ahead.
“Algorithms and technology are no longer optional. Because of smartphones, we are seeing magnitude increases in consumer banking and other financial services transactions on a daily basis,” stated Sultan Meghji, Chief Innovation Officer for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Office of Innovation.
Meghji served as a panelist at a Duke in DC briefing for congressional staff and D.C. policymakers “Banking in the Digital Age: Developing Smart Policy Around Innovation in Financial Services.” Jimmie Lenz, director of the Master of Engineering in FinTech and the Master of Engineering in Cyber at the Duke Pratt School of Engineering, joined Meghji for the December 9th conversation.
Professor Lenz set the tone for the conversation by highlighting the global interconnectedness of the world’s financial services. He went on to note people make a mistake when looking at these systems on a country-by-country basis.
Meghji’s interest in these issues stems from his experiences in East Africa, where digital banking technologies servicing rural populations have existed for decades.
Looking now at the advancement of AI, quantum computing, crypto, and other technologies; Meghji thinks involving these technologies in the financial services systems, is no longer a choice.
Lenz and Meghji also discussed the advancement of these technologies in the banking sector, algorithmic bias, the importance of quality and valid data, risk, and accountability standards in the industry. Lenz pointed out that, “the federal government is now being asked to do the things that companies should have done all along. This isn’t a “government problem” this is an investment in [companies] infrastructure.”
Meghji noted in the U.S. regulatory model, “we want to make sure you have the systems in place so that you’re managing the risk appropriately.”
Lenz added that regulatory policy should, “always further innovation, not hamper it. And when I think of smart policies, I think of policies that are more dynamic, are more relative to an environment rather than specific situations.” He stressed the need to stay on the forefront of these technologies and noted, “we shouldn’t have more regulation simply to protect the stalwarts in the financial services industry who don’t want to invest in their own infrastructure.”
Meghji encouraged attendees to learn more and understand why some of these systems are important to protect the safety and soundness of the American financial system.
“This is a different world than it was, just even five years ago… yet, we look at our security apparatus and how much has it changed?” said Judith Kelley, Dean of the Duke Sanford School for Public Policy.
On December 7th, Duke in DC and the Sanford School for Public Policy hosted an event, titled “Trends, Challenges, and Solutions for Government National Security Apparatus” to address the rapidly evolving global landscape and the U.S.’ 21st century national security apparatus. Issues like climate change, cyber security and immigration all contribute to the list of threats we face as a nation. Moderated by Dean Kelley, this event was part of a year-long celebration of 50 years of Public Policy at Duke.
Is the American national security apparatus equipped to handle these new and pressing issues? The event’s panelists – Sue Gordon, former U.S. Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence and Duke University Rubenstein Fellow, and Tim Nichols, former Intelligence Officer in the Marine Corps and visiting professor of the practice at Sanford addressed this question head on.
Nichols, who also leads the Sanford School for Public Policy’s new Master of National Security Policy program, mentioned several non-traditional challenges that our national security apparatus has been called to address. “I’m pleased to see challenges like climate change, migration, pandemics and cyber threats starting to enter the lexicon of our Congress and Executive Branch.”
Gordon added that the COVID-19 pandemic actually improved the clarity to which we are observe many of these changes. “In this administration, you’re seeing a recognition that we need to address some of these changes… whether it’s climate change and domestic extremism and economic insecurity as now being national security issues.”
“What’s happening at our borders, what’s happening with pandemics, what’s happening with climate, what’s happening with supply chain/food insecurity/economic security is actually national security.”
Sue gordon
From the left, Sue Gordon, Tim Nichols and Judith Kelley
On Cyber Security…
Creating cyber policy change in Congress can be complicated. Gordon explained, “if you’re going to brief on cyber to the Congress, you have to hit Senate Intelligence committee, armed services committees, judiciary committees and the homeland security committees.” She added, “We have to stop thinking about cyber as something technical and different and recognize that it is the way the interests everywhere are being accomplished now.”
While neither Gordon nor Nichols saw the need for a designated “cyber force” agency, Nichols provided three key ideas for cyber: the importance of strong central policy, an agile resource line, and sufficient investment in cyber technologies.
On Veteran’s Affairs…
“If you asked me what it takes to treat veterans who have been scarred, mentally incapacitated after war, it takes more than you can ever give,” Nichols added, “the lesson to be learned is let’s try to avoid military conflict as much as possible.”
Unfortunately, he also recognized the VA’s current lack of resources when it comes to adequately address veterans’ needs, both mental and physical.
On Foreign Aid and Competition…
On the topic of international competition, Kelley alluded to the European Union’s (EU) involvement with the Global Gateway project. Noting the project’s goal of investing in overseas projects is “clearly intended as somewhat of an answer to China’s global Belt and Road Initiative in the digital space in particular.”
In terms of a national technology strategy, Gordon explained that “from a mindset perspective, we still think of critical technologies as something that needs to be protected,” and said the E.U.’s actions highlight a key message, “technology is ubiquitous.”
On Immigration…
Throughout the discussion, Gordon and Nichols highlighted the shifting purview of national security. “What’s happening at our borders, what’s happening with pandemics, what’s happening with climate, what’s happening with supply chain/food insecurity/economic security,” Gordon explained, “is actually national security.”
Nichols also mentioned the enormous “resource gap” that exists within our immigration system – although the capabilities and policies exist to address border security, current resource levels are not sufficient and there needs to be a ‘holistic approach.’
On Disinformation…
Kelley turned the conversation to the role of the intelligence community in battling disinformation online. As the federal government begins to address the issue, Kelley asked the panelists, “How are we supposed to get the maximum out of our efforts to counter misinformation if we’re not coordinated on what we’re trying to do in that sphere?”
“The intelligence community has done a really good job of exposing disinformation for policymakers,” Nichols explained and after conveying this information, it becomes a “policymaker decision as to what to do.”
On the Changing National Security Landscape…
As the world continues to evolve, the panel alluded to the importance of regularly reviewing and in some cases, restructuring the national security apparatus. Nichols explained there are still “good bones in our structure.” Rather than completing redesigning the apparatus, he called attention to the importance of the government to recruit strong talent and the need for congressional committees to “really address their structure and how it impedes agility in the Executive Branch.”
Gordon took a more “from scratch” approach, emphasizing the importance of designing the national security apparatus based on, ”what should it look like today?” The Sanford School for Public Policy’s new Master of National Security Policy program is still accepting applications for Fall 2022 and you can learn more about the program here.
“No human can calculate patterns from large databases in their head. If we want humans to make data-driven decisions, machine learning can help with that,” CynthiaRudin explained regarding the opportunities that artificial intelligence (AI) presents for a wide range of issues, including criminal justice.
On November 15th, Rudin, Duke professor of computer science and recipient of the 2021 Squirrel AI Award for Artificial Intelligence for the Benefit of Humanity. joined her colleague Brandon Garrett, the L. Neil Williams, Jr. Professor of Law and director of the Wilson Center for Science and Justice, for “The Equitable, the Ethical and the Technical: Artificial Intelligence’s Role in The U.S. Criminal Justice System.” The panel was moderated by Nita Farahany, the Robinson O. Everett Professor of Law and founding director of Duke Science & Society. At the event, there was representation from numerous House and Senate congressional offices as well as the Departments of Transportation and Justice, National Institutes of Health (NIH), American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the Duke community.
Rudin started off the conversation by providing listeners with a simple definition, “AI is when machines perform tasks that are typically something that a human would perform.” She also described machine learning as a type of “pattern-mining, where an algorithm is looking for patterns in data that can be useful.” For instance, an algorithm can analyze an individual’s criminal history to identify patterns and could be used to help predict whether that person is more likely to commit a crime in the future.
From the left: Cynthia Rudin, Nita Farahany and Brandon Garrett
Garrett added that AI applications pose a potential solution for human error – we can be biased, too lenient, too harsh, or “just inconsistent” – and these flaws can be exacerbated by time constraints and other factors. When it comes to AI in the criminal justice system, an important question to consider is whether AI has the potential to provide “better information to inform better outcomes” and better approaches to the criminal system, especially considering the presence of racial disparities.
However, applying AI tools to the criminal justice system should not be taken lightly. “There are a lot of issues that we need to take into account as we are designing AI tools for criminal justice,” said Farahany, “including issues like fairness and privacy, particularly with biometric data since you can’t change your biometrics, or transparency, which is related to due process.”
What does it mean for an algorithm to be fair? Rudin estimated that about “half the theoretical computer scientists in the world are working to define algorithmic fairness.” So, researchers like her are looking at different fairness definitions and trying to determine whether the risk prediction models being used in the justice system satisfy those definitions of fairness.
When it comes to facial recognition systems there is “generally a tradeoff between privacy, fairness and accuracy,” Rudin stated. When software searches the general public’s pictures, it invades individual privacy, however, because the model collects pictures of everyone, it’s extremely accurate and unbiased. Similarly, Garrett noted that the federal government is a heavy user of facial recognition technologies and there is no law that regulates it, pointing to the federal FACE database. “One would hope that the federal government would be a leader in thinking carefully about those issues and that hasn’t always been true,” however, he also praised the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and Army Research Lab for their work in the space.
Throughout the conversation, the speakers emphasized the importance of transparency and interpretability, as opposed to “black box AI” models.
“A black box predictive model,” said Rudin, “is a formula that is too complicated for any human to understand or it’s proprietary, which means nobody is allowed to understand its inner workings.” Likening the concept to a “secret sauce” formula, Rudin explained that many people believe that, due to its secretive nature, black box AI must be extremely accurate. However, she pointed out the model’s limitations and occasional inaccuracies, whereas interpretable and “understandable to humans” models can perform just as well.
“Interpretation also matters, because we want people like judges to know what they are doing,” explained Garrett, “and if they don’t know what something means, then they may be a lot less likely to rely on it.”
In the discussion, Garrett also gave his thoughts about legislation currently being considered in Congress. He mentioned the recently introduced Justice in Forensic Algorithms Act, which seeks to allocate additional resources to NIST. Regarding the legal landscape of AI and criminal justice, he recommended that the federal government provide “resources for NIST to be doing vetting and auditing of these technologies, and they should not be black box, they should be interpretable and all of that information should be accessible to all of the sides – the judge, prosecution and defense – so that they can understand the results that these technologies are spitting out and so they can be explained to jurors and other fact finders.”
Upon exiting the military, veterans encounter unique challenges when transitioning to the civilian workforce. Housed at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business, the Veteran Transitions Research Initiative (VTRI) conducts research that can help inform initiatives focused on enhancing veterans’ transition to the workforce. The VTRI’s work has received national attention and participation from Microsoft, Amazon, the Call of Duty Endowment, LinkedIn and several U.S. universities.
Aaron C. Kay, the J Rex Fuqua Professor of International Management at the Duke Fuqua School of Business, Sean Kelley, Duke Fuqua School of Business Faculty in Residence and David Sherman, professor of social psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB), co-lead the VRTI’s research efforts, centered around issues related to veteran hiring and bias. Stemming from his experience serving in the U.S. Navy, Kelley was motivated to break down barriers for his fellow veterans entering the civilian workforce.
In honor of Veterans Day and the important work the VTRI does for veterans, Kay answered five questions about his research on veteran hiring and bias:
What initially drove you to research veteran hiring and bias?
I’ve always studied issues related to discrimination, stereotyping and inequality from a social psychological lens. Much of my work has looked at those issues in the context of gender and also socio-economic status. Sean Kelley had taken an interest in my research on how wording choices in job advertisements can contribute to gender inequality in the applicant pool.
A few years later, he reached out to ask me what type of similar work there is on the psychological processes that affect how people treat military veterans in the workplace. Listening to Sean, it became clear to me this is a real social justice issue that needs attention. A post-doctoral student I was working with at the time, Steven Shepherd, and I started to research some of the ways people might unwittingly stereotype veterans. This research led to a publication showing that people view veterans as great fits for jobs that require a lot of doing but less adept for jobs that require feeling and relating to others. And we were off and running.
What is an example of a unique challenge that veterans face as they transition to civilian careers?
I tend to think of this more from the perspectives of the obstacles that veterans face that other, non-veterans, do not. The most glaring is stereotypes, or preconceptions people hold about military veterans. And, in particular, the beliefs they hold about veterans that, while maybe positive and seemingly complimentary, are nonetheless stereotypes. When an average hirer or manager learns an applicant or an employee is a veteran, what immediately comes to mind regarding their strengths? What do they assume (or presume) about that person’s motives, interests, and talents and, importantly, how do those presumptions affect the jobs they assign them to and where they get funneled? People tend to have a sense that negative beliefs are “stereotypes” and so they at least try to regulate them. But they often are unaware of the ways the positive or flattering preconceptions they hold about a group can also be restrictive which, ironically, can make them even more problematic. Much of our research is investigating what, specifically, these positive stereotypes look like and what effects they are having on employment outcomes.
What prompted you to start the Veterans Transitions Research Initiative and what are your plans for the future of the initiative?
There are many people doing wonderful important research on psychological and social issues related to veteran transitions. But the topic is not mainstream amongst researchers – like me – that generally investigate social justice, social inequality, discrimination and stereotyping. The point of the VTRI is to inspire more people to take up this issue in their research.
We – the VTRI, while located at Duke, is co-directed with David Sherman, a social psychologist at UCSB and Sean Kelley, an Executive in Residence at Fuqua – feel more minds are needed, and the VTRI seeks to encourage more social scientists, especially in psychology and organizational behavior, to integrate this population of military veterans and this issue more generally (veteran transitions) into their programs of research, and to test and develop their theories in this specific context. We are working hard on publishing highly visible work that makes this point and bringing people together – researchers with a wide range of experience working with veterans as well as industry partners – to learn from and inspire one another.
How can employers better support their veteran and military-affiliated employees?
One way to approach it is by looking towards other examples of programmatic research on transitions that have been successful at experimentally testing and implementing interventions on a wide scale, for example, through onboarding efforts with students from a wide range of backgrounds who are entering college. They have found that messages centered on how challenges – such as feeling as though one doesn’t belong at the institution – are common, experienced widely, but get better over time can help students succeed in the new environment, particularly when there are other aspects of the institution that are committed to the success of all students.
Are there ways the federal government can support your research or benefit from the findings of this research?
We have given a talk on our research at the Department of Defense’s Military-to-Civilian Transition Research Forum. This was a great experience as the forum brings together researchers from different disciplines – social psychology, industrial-organizational psychology, military psychology – as well as people from government and veteran-serving organizations. This forum would seem to be a great arena for the federal government to directly support and stimulate relevant research via funding grants.
As technology progresses, new concerns continue to sprout up along with it. “Ransomware attacks have surged in 2020,” Curtis Dukes with the Center for Internet Security stated. Going on to elaborate, “cyber criminals are also expanding their target set and shifting their focus to privately owned critical infrastructure providers.”
On September 14, Duke in DC hosted a congressional briefing, From Technological Advancement to FinTech – How Congress Should Think About Cyber Policy, which addressed many new technological threats faced in the U.S. including ransomware, cryptocurrency and much more and what measures policymakers can take to prevent them.
Joining Curtis Dukes in the conversation was featured panelist Jimmie Lenz, director of the Master of Engineering in FinTech and the Master of Engineering in Cybersecurity at the Duke Pratt School of Engineering and moderator Kim Kotlar, adjunct assistant professor at the Pratt School of Engineering and Duke cyber mentor.
Ransomware attacks happen when cyber criminals use malicious software. Dukes stated “they are delivered as either an email attachment or as an embedded link – to infect the network and lock out the critical files until the ransom is paid.” He explained that ransomware attack patterns are also evolving, and every industry vertical could be a target.
Kotlar noted that we have seen an increase in cyber-attacks related to cryptocurrency to which Lenz replied, “ransomware and cryptocurrency are becoming inextricably linked.”
“Cryptocurrency is fairly new…we certainly had ransomware attacks before, but they are much more prolific,” said Lenz, an expert in machine learning, blockchain and financial innovation.
When it comes to how to prevent these kinds of attacks, Lenz noted that most current measures are defensive rather than offensive. He suggested that “the preventative side is where we should be thinking and where we have opportunity.”
From left to right: Jimmie Lenz, Kim Kotlar and Curtis Dukes
The panelists each lined out where they hope to see congressional action on these issues. Dukes noted that he would like to see Congress implement a cyber breach notification system and incentivize the adoption of national security best practices. When it comes to cryptocurrency, Lenz said the one thing Congress can do is ‘incentivize.’
In effect, this would create a ‘bureau of cyber statistics’ which, as Dukes explained, “would establish the quantitative foundation and produce those type of statistical analysis on this evolution of the cyber ecosystem.” Further, this new body would provide the basis for informed policymaking and aid national risk assessments.
The group also agreed that a large problem in cybersecurity is the lack of data and information on certain attacks – including how attackers got around a victim’s network and defenses.
Lenz also discussed the continued advancements in quantum computing sciences with reference to IonQ – the first publicly traded pure-play quantum computing company – founded by Duke’s Jungsang Kim and Chris Monroe.
“We should be talking about quantum hardening,” Lenz stated, “we’re going to have to leapfrog things, we don’t have the time for linear.”
“We’re going to have to leapfrog things, we don’t have time for linear.”
Jimmie Lenz
Lenz described FinTech as the “melding of finance and technology.” In his early career as a trader, he witnessed how the field evolved from a highly manual environment to an increasingly electronic and automated financial ecosystem and said it has only continued to evolve rapidly over just the past decade.
“In the past, somebody went to a bank because it was like a supermarket – you could go there and buy all kinds of different services. Now, I don’t have to go to a supermarket… I can do all this on my phone.”
Above all else, the panel highlighted the critical need to properly educate people on the risks associated with cybersecurity and how to properly train and approach ransomware attempts. “There really needs to be an education initiative,” said Lenz “we would be happy to do this at Duke for whatever members are interested. Education in this area – because it is so new – is so important and understanding the architecture underneath… in particular before legislating.”
“In the cyber domain where collaboration is king,” said Kotlar, “we need people with all skill sets with different levels of interests to come together.” Lenz, who is leading Duke’s new strategic partnership with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) on risk management, FinTech and cyber also emphasized this need for collaboration.
“A lot of regulation takes place in a rearview mirror, and we don’t want to do that,” said Lenz.
As the summer comes to a close, Congress is returning to our nation’s capital and school is back in session on Duke’s campus. After a rather atypical summer recess, the FY22 budget and bipartisan infrastructure bill are still first on the agenda for lawmakers returning to Washington this month.
FY22 Budget & Appropriations
Budget Reconciliation:
In August, the Senate and House approved the $3.5 trillion FY22 budget resolution, which unlocked the budget reconciliation process. Duke’s current priorities for the FY22 budget resolution and reconciliation package include federal research funding, doubling the maximum Pell Grant and providing a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients. The House package addresses most of these priorities and details can be found in this summary.
The fate of the $3.5 trillion package remains unclear, but the Office of Government Relations will continue to advocate for Duke’s priorities as the process moves forward this fall.
FY 22 Appropriations:
Summer is typically a busy time for congressional appropriators, and this year was no different. The delayed release of the FY 22 budget request compressed the timetable, and the House launched into a flurry of activity in June and July. To date, the House Appropriations Committee has approved all 12 of the FY 22 funding bills, and the full House has passed 9 of the 12 bills. The Senate Appropriations Committee started its work just before the August district work period and approved 3 of its bills. Below is a snapshot of the current status of some of Duke’s appropriations priorities.
A continuing resolution to keep the government funded beyond the end of this fiscal year on September 30th is a given, and a messy debate is expected as the endgame for FY 22 appropriations collides with calls to raise the debt ceiling to avoid a default.
Research and Innovation
Congress spent a good part of the early summer debating and passing legislation that sets forth a bold vision for ensuring the nation’s global leadership in scientific research and innovation. Among the legislation includes the Senate-passed U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) as well as both the House-passed NSF and DOE for the Future Acts. The House Science, Space and Technology Committee has also approved a reauthorization bill for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a bill to create regional innovation hubs and legislation to create a new federal research and development program for the bioeconomy.
These proposals would authorize more robust funding levels for the NSF, DOE Office of Science, NIST and DARPA, and seeks to spread the funding across the country instead of at a few concentrated high-tech regions. Congressional negotiators are expected to work this fall to try to resolve the differences between the Senate and House legislation.
In the Executive Branch, the White House launched a National Artificial Intelligence Task Force which aims to expand access to critical resources and tools to help stimulate AI innovation nationwide.
Foreign Influence and Research Security
The debate over federal innovation legislation was infused with concerns over the nation’s competitiveness advantage vis a vis China. In response, many of these bills contain provisions that seek to address research security and foreign influence focused on recurring themes such as participation in foreign talent recruitment programs and disclosure of financial transactions between universities and the Chinese government. A sampling of these provisions can be found here and here.
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) released guidance for research security and researcher responsibility this summer. This guidance builds upon work from the Trump administration to strengthen protections of U.S. government supported research and development while also ensuring continued innovation and collaboration. The guidance outlined that it will be focusing on disclosure policy, oversight and enforcement and research security programs.
Higher Education and Back to School
The higher education community recently launched the #DoublePell website, which advocates for Congress to double the maximum Pell Grant award to $13,000 and increase funding for other federal student aid programs in FY22 to make attending college more accessible and affordable. As noted above the final numbers for these funding issues will depend on negotiations in Congress that are ongoing.
Duke University, the larger higher education community, and others in the business community across the county have continued to urge Congress and the Biden administration to provide a pathway to citizenship for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) eligible individuals and dreamers.
The recent Texas district court ruling has thrown into further limbo the lives of hundreds of thousands of young Dreamers, and gravely impacted their employers, families, and communities. The Biden administration has appealed the Texas court ruling. On Sunday September 19 the Senate Parliamentarian ruled against Democrats including in their budget reconciliation package a pathway to legal status for nearly 8 million undocumented people. Congressional Democrats continue to explore alternative legislative fixes to provide a legal path to citizenship.
Duke signed on to an amicus brief in support of Optional Practical Training (OPT), which emphasized the program’s important role in providing experiential learning opportunities, which allow students to practice and implement the educational skills they have developed on campus.
On September 14th, the State Department stated, in accordance with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), it will begin allowing consular offices through the end of 2021 to waive visa interview requirements for F, M, and academic J visa applicants who meet certain criteria. The department emphasized, “International students are now and always have been among the Department of State’s highest priorities.”
Biden Administration
Throughout the past several months, more individuals have been confirmed by Congress to take up their appointed positions in the Biden administration. The Office of Government Relations has an up to date tracker that highlights positions of most relevance to Duke.
Tax
This last week the House Ways and Means Committee passed the Build Back Better Act that address a number of higher education’s top tax priorities, including taxation of Pell Grants and the interaction with the American Opportunity Tax Credit, mitigate the tax on net investment income, authorize direct pay bonds modeled on the Build America Bonds program, and reinstate advance refunding of tax-exempt bonds. The bill would also permit students with a felony drug conviction to claim the American Opportunity Tax Credit.
Updates From Duke in DC
The summer didn’t stop Duke from having an active presence in Washington, D.C. The Duke in DC office held another round of its Beyond Talking Points series, focusing on environmental justice from multiple lenses including food and agriculture, trade and diplomacy, and water and infrastructure. The office also held a congressional briefing on childcare infrastructure and the Duke Family Connects model as it relates to current legislation being considered in Congress. Finally in September, Duke in DC hosted a conversation on cybersecurity, emerging technologies and FinTech, featuring Director of the Master of Engineering in FinTech and the Master of Engineering in Cybersecurity at the Duke Pratt School of Engineering, Jimmie Lenz and Duke cyber mentor and retired naval officer, congressional staffer and NSA executive, Kim Kotlar.
Duke professor emeritus of sociology and founding director of the Duke Global Value Chains Center Gary Gereffi came to D.C in July to provide expert testimony for the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. Gereffi briefed members on global supply chains and noted the importance of a renewed federal focus on supply chain resiliency. You can access a recap and full recording of his testimony on our blog here.
Gary Gereffi, professor emeritus of sociology and founding director of the Duke Global Value Chains Center visited the nation’s capital on July 15, 2021, to brief Congress on global supply chain resiliency.
“Recent disruptions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have brought both the significance and risks of supply chains to the American consciousness as never before…It has resulted in unprecedented supply shortages and demand fluctuations that have affected virtually all U.S. industries,” Gereffi testified.
He went on the note the importance of a renewed federal focus on supply chain resiliency. Following up on a White House report on the topic in June 2021, the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing on July 15th, Implementing Supply Chain Resiliency, which included testimony from Gary Gereffi.
Gereffi’s opening statement gave senators an overview of the recent emergence of supply chains as a research field and looked at the evolving geographic shifts and focus on Asia in supply chains.
Highlighting the traditional model of top-down supply chain models, Gereffi offered the success of North Carolina in the Global Economy Project as an example of a bottom-up model that builds resiliency in the United States.
Looking at the NC textile industry as an example, Gereffi noted, “Among the insights gleaned from the NC-Global Economy project is that traditional industries like textiles and furniture have adapted in striking ways to recent political, economic and technological shifts. While North Carolina’s textile firms accommodated NAFTA by continuing to supply apparel customers that moved to Mexico and Central America, the industry also embraced technological change via the growth of nonwoven and “technical” textiles in the state’s output and exports.”
Environmental justice touches all aspects of life – from the food we put on our tables, the water in our faucets, the communities we live in, even our international affairs and much more. As the Biden administration has already set goals to address the climate crisis, a key component in tackling climate issues, domestic and abroad, is environmental justice.
Duke in DC recently hosted a Beyond Talking Points virtual event series, which convened a group of experts from Duke University and the Aspen Institute to discuss the environmental justice impacts that result from food, agriculture, trade, international relations and water infrastructure. The panelists considered ways the federal government could incentivize or advance sustainability as well as increase access to essential resources.
Beyond Talking Points is a regular briefing series exposing the federal policy community in Washington, DC to in-depth discussions on critical issues facing America and the world. Each event features a complex and relevant policy topic to be discussed by a panel of experts from Duke and external organizations.
This series was held on consecutive Friday mornings beginning on May 21st through June 4th, and featured Duke faculty from the Sanford School of Public Policy, Divinity School, Law School, Pratt School of Engineering, Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions and John Hope Franklin Humanities Center.
The events were attended by a range of congressional staffers representing over 30 House and 14 Senate member offices, including 7 different offices representing North Carolina’s congressional delegation, as well as 6 Senate and 9 House committees. Other attendees included staff from 6 different federal agencies.
Below is more information about the panel from each conversation with the title serving as hyperlink to the recorded discussion.
