本文探讨了在现实世界系统中使用电子战的地理定位所产生的实际现实，包括目标的位置，传感器位置，方向或速度的误差，以及随着时间的推移重复测量的影响。书中解决的问题与准确定位和跟踪无人机、飞机和轮船直接相关。作为作者上一本著作《电子战的发射器检测和地理定位》（Artech House，2019）的姊妹篇，本书深入探讨了现实世界的复杂性，包括：在不同坐标系内工作和转换，合并有关目标的先验信息、传感器不确定性、随时间推移使用多个快照，以及估计移动目标的当前位置和速度。此处描述的电子书版本包含多个软件和视频链接，可以从公开可用的 Git 存储库下载这些链接。本书还包括开发新算法所需的所有 MATLAB 代码，这些算法允许与经典技术进行比较，并使您能够解释传感器的定时、位置、速度或方向错误。凭借其对详细地理定位技术和数据的独特和更新的报道，以及对其他软件和视频的轻松链接访问，这是一本需要有关地理定位算法开发或应用的最佳信息的工程师和电子战从业者的必备书。对于涵盖射频信号处理主题的工程系的教师和学生，以及对SDR和UAV的新颖应用感兴趣的任何人来说，它也是一个有用的教学资源。

In his 1837 novel Grandeur et Décadence de César Birotteau, the French novelist and playwright Honoré de Balzac portrayed a successful and arrogant Parisian perfumer who, a victim of his success, became delusional and squandered his wealth with visions of grandeur and frivolous expenditures. French digital policy does the same, navigating between grandeur and decadence.

A partial “decoupling” of U.S. and Chinese technology ecosystems is well underway. Without a clear strategy, Washington risks doing too little or—more likely—too much to curb technological interdependence.

In contrast to the international trade issues around the movement of goods that defined 20th century globalization, trade in the 21st century is increasingly digital and knowledge-based, in large part, as digital technologies enable data-driven innovation, the ongoing disaggregation of production, and the increasing trade in services. Modern trade is more about the movement of bytes, ideas, information, and services, which are subject to a variety of non-tariff policies that affect digital and digitally enabled trade. However, the ever-growing gap between technological innovation and domestic and international policy frameworks shows that many policymakers are struggling to adapt rules and norms to today’s digital economy, which detracts from the potential economic and social benefits of these technologies. In the years ahead, policymakers will face a key choice in deciding whether they want to be bold and adjust policies in order to embrace a truly global market for digitally enabled trade in goods and services.

This chapter examines China’s increasingly assertive efforts to influence international data governance, especially cross-border data flows, and promote its concept of “cyber sovereignty,” while also analyzing its restrictive approach to domestic data governance as the basis for its international advocacy efforts.

Algorithms are ubiquitous in our daily lives. They affect the way we shop, interact, and make exchanges on the marketplace. In this regard, algorithms can also shape competition on the marketplace. Companies employ algorithms as technologically innovative tools in an effort to edge out competitors. Antitrust agencies have increasingly recognized the competitive benefits, but also competitive risks that algorithms entail. Over the last few years, many algorithm-driven companies in the digital economy have been investigated, prosecuted and fined, mostly for allegedly unfair algorithm design. Legislative proposals aim at regulating the way algorithms shape competition. Consequently, a so-called “algorithmic antitrust” theory and practice have also emerged. This book provides a more innovation-driven perspective on the way antitrust agencies should approach algorithmic antitrust.

Aurelien Portuese, “Pour une concurrence libre et non faussée pour le Cloud computing” in Favoriser l’adoption du Cloud en France, Institut Choiseul (41-55).

Data governance and the management of global digital data flows pose immense challenges for global governance. International digital data agreements must be embedded in revisions of the global “rules-based” order that emerged out of Bretton Woods in the aftermath of World War II to manage global economic issues. In that spirit, the countries that value a rules-based global digital economy need to come together to enact new global data-management rules. It is becoming more and more critical to treat data as the key driver of today’s global economy. Creating new rules will require policymakers to alter their current approaches, which have led to a stalemate in making progress on frameworks for the global Internet. China should revise its restrictive approach so that it can play a more constructive role in debates and negotiations between like-minded countries. On China and Internet rules, if the Chinese Government retains its restrictive approach to data, AI, and digital trade, it will increasingly find itself excluded or marginalized in global discussions on digital issues. Many other countries see the Chinese approach as far from the baseline of emerging global norms and as self-serving for China from a trade perspective.

由 RFF 的 Dallas Burtraw 部分编辑的一本书介绍了美国气候和能源政策的清洁空气法案的经验教训。