“Beast in the Machine” (BITM) was presented by Red Thread X in DC, in a side-event during the Association of the United States Army – AUSA show 2025. I read it cover to cover and will avoid spoilers.
What is it
246pp. of text and 29pp for notes: a well-documented essay. It’s at once:
- a History book, covering over 100 years of unmanned weapons and warfare evolution;
- a Technology review, discussing Robotics and AI in detail [the topic that attracted me in first palce];
- an essay on Organizational Behavior and Change Management within the Military context.
Why it matters
BITM demystifies myths on Technology and stimulates thought on the imperatives for the present time.
One example: it challenges the idea that tools such as Additive Manufacturing and AI inherently “serve democracy” simply because they broaden access. Unfortunately, low-cost, high-performance technologies can also empower actors outside the traditional state structures. Technology itself is neutral – the Ancient Greeks would warn that being a human creation Technology is ambiguous, by nature. Outcomes depend on governance, design, and intent.
Another one: how do established Institutions — including the Military — absorb Innovation quickly as well as responsibly? How do they manage inevitable setbacks without overcorrecting? Possible solutions are provided by Dougherty.
It’s interesting that BITM does not indulge in depicting apocalyptic, dystopian scenarios. The author’s different perspective is eager to describe how things should be designed so that technological progress aligns with human responsibility.
‘The AI of things’ and Defense matters
Over-optimism, over-empowerment of AI: why we could fall in that trap. This topic is well discussed with a thorough list of ‘how AI can fail’ cases. Context, scenario awareness is a key factor, but not the only one presented. I’ll only add that “to delegate” comes from the Latin verb “de-ligere”, that literally means “to unleash”: delegation is intrinsically a matter of design & responsibility.
In defense strategy, technology adoption might rarely be optional — which makes governance and design choices even more critical. BITM advises to manage early failures carefully – that’s a topic that I never saw highlighted in Change Management conversations.
The core of it
BITM seems to carry out two missions:
- Making a wake-up call.
This book seems to be dedicated to to policy makers, and ultimately to ‘we the people’. Un-manning weapons does not de-humanize responsibility. We need to decide and establish the future we want. The horses are leaving the stable, but we’re in time to catch them. (That sounds aligned with futurist Amy Webb’s appeals).
- Proposing frameworks for Ethical and Strategic decisions.
Several pages are dedicated to defining the ideal man-machine relationship in the context of AI-powered weapons. Dougherty indicates one known case of excellent, functional and proven wingman that makes the last chapter a true gem. I won’t be a spoiler, but for the sake of a pop-culture reference, let me refer you to a couple of iconic props from a popular TV show: Knight-rider’s autonomous, AI agent-powered car and the smart watch that was allowing a seamless communication with it – all in all: what a wingman. Isn’t that all within reach today, on a technology standpoint?
Drifting thoughts after reading BITM
#1 – Unmanning as a process
If the history of war is an unmanning process, like this book seems to indicate, what’s the final landing? A war of physical-AI or a war of AI agents hacking assets (of any sort)? Or perhaps AI agents trying to hack each other, in a soft-ware/soft-war duel? How much will conflicts be de-materialized, possibly reducing the cost of lives and collateral damage, parting ways from field battle, invasions, firing fires, planting the flag? How much of that can be actually avoided?
#2 – Some like it Dystopian
Dougherty helps dismissing a popular dystopic scenario: AI acquiring self-consciousness and identifying man as a villain, ultimately fighting him. That probably assumes that ‘we’ll get the AI we deserve‘ [I’m paraphrasing what Barry McGeough said after SXSW 2025, discussing today’s state of the Internet]: AI that’s fully anthropo-morphic in its reasoning, but mostly aggressive, testosteronic. Dougherty explains that it might just not go that way.
Questions from philosopher Massimo Cacciari may come-in handy (here I’ll be the translator-traitor): ‘should AI truly mimic human reasoning, in its continuous, complex states, will it also inherit our consciousness of the end to come, the anguish of facing death? Will it experience our moods’ ups and downs?’ One could ask why man should appear as the villain, in this scenario.
Delegating, unleashing AI and robots as a consequence of over-optimism may lead to disaster – but you don’t need AI reaching self-consciousness for that. One human being in charge of the decision is enough. Sadly, the asymmetrical war, i.e. several Davids v. one or more Goliaths, seeking terror instead of victory is a dystopia that materialized already, in recent history.
Promotion
I’ve been discussing the topics of this compelling book over the past few weeks, meeting people at IDGA‘s Future Indirect Fires in DC, where three persons downloaded it as we spoke, at Military Additive Manufacturing Summit, MILAM, in Tampa FL and Defence Leaders‘ Combat Engineering and Logistics 2026, in Krakow. As the plane landed in Poland, a British gentleman approached me: “A friend recommended me the book you’re reading. Is it really that good?…”
“Beast in the Machine” might not be suitable for bed-time stories, as war is a bad thing and this book deals with it. At the same time, when it comes to AI and Robotics, wouldn’t you want to know what you need to know in order to make good decisions?
P.S. (a long one)
A shoot out to Jay Miseli: as I was leaving the seminar he organized in DC, I heard his voice: “Hey, Luigi!”, as he handed me a copy of “Beast in the Machine” – one of those moments that open new chapters. Thank you, good friend. You and your the team at The Red Thread X were right in discussing this great, deep work in the context of an Ethical discussion, because, as Professor Cacciari’s lieber meister used to say:
“Dealing with Technology without Philosophy is like being carpenters who must fix holes in a ship, but have no clue on how to do it, have the wrong tools and more importantly, don’t know where the ship is heading to”. – Emanuele Severino.
If anyone is interested, there will be another panel with the author of “Beast in the Machine” at the Austin RTX House – it should be clear by now that I strongly recommend it.
VP Sales and Marketing
VALIMET, Inc.