For many of its activities and operational parts, regarding academic researches, we require descriptions on guideline of what kind of activities we do, and what part of research that we do not accept.
A. In regard of military involvement
When it comes to military-specific research, we can guarantee and welcome the following type of military research. Such includes the following entries:
- Military history (campaigns, institutional evolution, doctrine history)
- Military strategy and theory (classical and contemporary strategic thought, doctrine analysis, game-theoretic models of conflict)
- Military philosophy and ethics (in exemplary, war theory, philosophy of deterrence, ethics of autonomy in conflict)
- Open-source simulation and wargaming (CMO-like strategic simulation, logistics modeling, campaign-level abstraction). Weapon simulation down to design levels are placed under restriction and perhaps, can not be allowed to research here.
- Organizational and institutional design (command hierarchy theory, C2 structure analysis, historical case studies of military bureaucracy)
- Open literature analysis (published doctrine, declassified historical archives, open-access defense economics)
- Science fiction / speculative worldbuilding grounded in military-institutional realism (as distinct from applied engineering).
All work under this track must be conducted as a formally scoped sub-lab under RHINELAB’s administrative framework, and is classified under SNIG (Special Research) unless considered otherwise. That also includes that it is subjected to the identical form of document registry and report, schedule report, record-keeping, and knowledge-concentration requirements as any other sub-lab and laboratory system, from inception.
The following would then list the opposite side, of which shall not be allowed to operate or inclusion thereof, into RHINELAB’s name, institutional affiliation and so on. Even people, yes, and don’t interloping them in there.
A.1. Classified-worthy or closed-source research
- Anything requiring clearance, NDA, or access to non-public defense data, or any given of research that can give third-party influence to force RHINELAB to recede its grounding and footing.
- Anything that cannot be published or reviewed under RHINELAB’s open knowledge operational framework.
- Anything sourced from or dependent on classified/restricted materials, regardless of origin. However, pre-classification from government entities research is not covered in this restriction.
A.2. Active weapon research (direct-kill) and applied lethality
- Weapon designs down to operational blueprint and actual full-scale weapon development.
- Weapon platform direct-kill deliverable, i.e. warhead, projectiles, missiles, etc.
A.3. CBRN-adjacent or dual-use hazardous domains
- Chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons research in any form
- Dual-use research where the line between “understanding” and “uplift” is not cleanly defensible. This means, under any circumstances of dual-use research, you must state so in the proposal document.
- Explosives, propellants, or energetic materials research that is used in warfare. Disclaimer on usage is required if you wish to research on those.
A.4 Cyber-offensive and infrastructure-attack research
- Malware, exploit development, or offensive cyber-operations research.
- Critical infrastructure attack/defeat research.
- Anything indistinguishable in output from an attack toolkit, regardless of stated intent.
Civil malware researches are permitted, however, you must doing so with a stated and reported, seen and supervised, contingency system with isolation methodologies and room for such. Leakage control and test ground compartmentalization is absolutely required, no removal or softening of condition.
A.5 Politically entangled or geopolitically live research
- Research tied to active, ongoing conflicts or disputed territorial claims.
- Research that could be read by specific third-party, or subject of interest as advocacy for a specific state, faction, or ongoing military action. regardless of moral compass.
- Anything requiring RHINELAB to take an implicit position on a live geopolitical conflict or even live socio-political conflict.
A.6 Research with confusing or entangled dependency chains
- Work dependent on data, tools, or partnerships whose provider, source, control and legitimacy of which also contains usage clarification can’t be fully disclosed or described and informed.
- Work entangled with defense-industry funding, classified contractors, or opaque institutional sponsors.
- Any dependency chain that can’t be fully documented in the registry.
A.7 High-controversy-to-value ratio research
- Research where the likely reputational cost to RHINELAB substantially exceeds its research or pedagogical value, foundational system and operational coherence.
Under this specific case, the judgment calls here default to the directors’ analysis and founder’s agreement and analysis, not the sub-lab lead in a given sense.
Ambiguous projects or so, that stand in between those lines of both the welcoming parties, and the prohibition research domains, the default is exclusion until formally reviewed and scoped. The risk is too big for us to perform such acts and works.