AI and nuclear doomsday

Speaker 1 To watch the new Catherine Bigelow movie, A House of Dynamite, on Netflix is to immediately start freaking out about a nuclear war. We've already lost one American city today.

Speaker 2 How many more do you want to risk? What kind of fucking question is that?

Speaker 1 Some enemy, it could be Russia, it could be North Korea, launches a nuclear warhead at Chicago from the Pacific Ocean.

Speaker 1 It's okay. The U.S.
has interceptors. They blast up into the air and they knock the nukes out.
That is actually true in real life. That's our nuclear defense system.

Speaker 1 Except in the movie, the interceptors fail. Except, it's just a movie.

Speaker 1 Except, a few days before it came out on Netflix, the Pentagon started freaking out and talking internally about how to calm people down.

Speaker 1 Coming up on Today Explained from AI to Golden Dome to Netflix's new hit, why everybody is suddenly talking about nuclear war.

Speaker 1 Support for Today Explained comes from BetterHelp. BetterHelp says it's winter and winter is often depressing.

Speaker 1 Instead of getting depressed, BetterHelp wants to encourage you to reach out to someone, perhaps get coffee with an old friend, perhaps write a letter to a family member, perhaps connect with a licensed therapist using BetterHelp.

Speaker 1 This month, don't wait to reach out, says BetterHelp.

Speaker 1 Whether you're checking in on a friend or reaching out to a therapist yourself, BetterHelp makes it easier to take that first step, says BetterHelp.

Speaker 1 You can get 10% off your first month at betterhelp.com slash explained. That's betterhelp.com slash explained.
Support for Today Explained comes from Crucible Moments. What is that?

Speaker 1 It's a podcast from Sequoia Capital. Every company's story is defined by those high-stakes moments that risk the business but can lead to greatness.
That's what Crucible Moments is all about.

Speaker 1 Hosted by Sequoia Capital's managing partner, Rulof Botha, Crucible Moments is returning for a brand new season.

Speaker 1 They're kicking things off with episodes episodes on Zipline and Bolt, two companies that are still around with surprising paths to success.

Speaker 1 Crucible Moments is out now and available everywhere you get your podcasts and at cruciblemoments.com. Listen to Crucible Moments today.

Speaker 5 What's happening? They're airing another episode of Today Explained.

Speaker 1 What about the 1,766 other episodes?

Speaker 5 They're already here.

Speaker 4 Oh,

Speaker 4 my

Speaker 1 God.

Speaker 1 I'm Noelle King with Tony Capaccio. Tony covers the Pentagon for Bloomberg News.
He's been covering defense for almost 40 years.

Speaker 1 So recently Tony found out that in the days before a house of dynamite dropped on Netflix, the U.S. Pentagon, of all people, started circulating a highly unusual response to the movie.

Speaker 6 So on October 16th, the Missile Defense Agency issued an internal memo, not publicly releasable, it said, underlined, to give a heads up to leaders that this movie was coming out broadly.

Speaker 6 And if there are questions about it, this is the current state of the U.S. ground-based missile defense program.

Speaker 2 The goal is to ensure leadership has situational awareness and is not surprised by the topic, which may come up in conversations or meetings.

Speaker 6 It was not a slash and burn memo, trashing the movie in total.

Speaker 6 It made points pretty clinically and like

Speaker 6 dryly that the movie is not accurate in terms of its portrayal of the success of the missile defense system. That's kind of the bottom line.

Speaker 6 And they gave four or five pages of technical insight into why they thought it was inaccurate.

Speaker 2 The fictional interceptors in the movie missed their target, and we understand this is intended to be a compelling part of the drama, intended for the entertainment of the audience.

Speaker 2 But results from real-world testing tell a vastly different story.

Speaker 6 If you look at the last decade with improved warheads, our success rate is 100%.

Speaker 6 Literally, that is accurate. The track record on this thing over the last four tests

Speaker 6 indicates 100% they did intercept the missile.

Speaker 6 It does say this, the 50-50 chance of intercepting narrative is based on our earliest prototype versions of the GBI system.

Speaker 6 when we operated with only a few early warning radars that were already decades old and a rudimentary command and control systems.

Speaker 6 We have since upgraded one of those early warning radars in California and added other upgraded early warning radars to the missile defense system.

Speaker 6 Plus, we also have added a sea-based radar in the Pacific capable of discriminating threat objects with great precision. End quote.
That's

Speaker 6 what they're laying out. What they have not done a good job of lately is putting this stuff out in public.

Speaker 1 The movie describes the process of interception chillingly as trying to hit a bullet with a bullet.

Speaker 6 Once the kill vehicle separates, our mid-course intercept system has a success rate of 61%.

Speaker 6 So it's a fucking coin toss.

Speaker 6 That's where $50 billion buys us.

Speaker 5 We are talking about hitting a bullet with a bullet.

Speaker 1 Which sounds like this will work if you're damn lucky. Is that about the size of it?

Speaker 6 You're going to love this. Inside the memo, there's actually a clinical description of hitting a bullet with a bullet.
But here's what I'm going to read this.

Speaker 6 Hitting a bullet with a bullet in terms of closing speeds is significantly less than hitting a missile with a missile.

Speaker 6 The highest velocity rifle rounds travel at 4,500 feet per second, giving closing velocity of two bullets around 2.75 kilometers per second.

Speaker 6 Missiles in space will have three to four times higher closing velocities.

Speaker 6 So I guess in layman's language, hitting a bullet with a bullet is not as difficult as hitting a missile with a missile.

Speaker 1 Okay, hitting a bullet with a bullet is not as difficult as hitting a missile with a missile.

Speaker 1 And the whole point is we're supposed to be terrified by the idea that like hitting a bullet with a bullet is really hard.

Speaker 1 So question then to you, Tony, is, we've talked on the show before about how President Trump would like to build a Golden Dome missile defense system.

Speaker 6 Once fully constructed, the Golden Dome will be capable of intercepting missiles even if they are launched from other sides of the world and even if they are launched from space.

Speaker 1 Where does something like that fit into this conversation about whether or not our systems that handle the nuclear threat are operating properly?

Speaker 6 So, if I knew nothing about missile defense and I'm a lay viewer of this movie, and I know a little bit about what Golden Dome is supposed to be because the president says so, I would scratch my head and say, well,

Speaker 6 if this limited defense system didn't work against one missile,

Speaker 6 maybe they got a point. Maybe it should be a broader system to protect parts of the United States.

Speaker 6 You know, maybe I should wait and see what they disclose. That's a logical way to look at that.

Speaker 1 That is what I thought, truthfully, last night as I was watching this movie. Okay, maybe we need golden dough.

Speaker 6 The movie gives one pause in terms of, well, maybe he's got a point.

Speaker 6 The problem with his point is that he said nothing about it beyond that it's going to be $175 billion and it should be deployed later by the end of his administration.

Speaker 6 The Pentagon's said virtually squat about the configuration of it, where this $175 billion estimate came from, and the technical difficulties involved. So we're in a wait-and-see mode on Golden Dome.

Speaker 6 But the movie does

Speaker 6 raise a question, if this limited system doesn't work, do we really need a broader system?

Speaker 1 How rare is it for the Pentagon to sort of have a response to something that's in theaters now?

Speaker 6 We're talking incredibly rare.

Speaker 6 In 1982, the Pentagon was asked by ABC to vet their script for the famous Day After.

Speaker 6 This is a movie of a nuclear holocaust in Kansas hit by a, we're not sure where the missile came from, but a nuclear holocaust the day after a nuclear bomb.

Speaker 8 Roger, we've got 32 targets in track and 10 impacting points.

Speaker 8 I want to confirm, is this an exercise?

Speaker 8 Roger, copy, this is not an exercise.

Speaker 6 The Pentagon reviewed the film. They didn't want to give aid to the filmmaker, ABC,

Speaker 6 in the form of National Guard or military equipment because they felt the script implied that NATO started World War III.

Speaker 6 But, and I saw some of the documents, I wrote about it at the time, they actually complemented some of the film's depiction

Speaker 6 of the aftermath. We're talking, though, rarely does the Pentagon come out and blast a movie.

Speaker 6 They support a lot of films. They supported Mission Impossible, the last one,

Speaker 6 the last two Mission Impossibles, with V-22 Ospreys, with the use of the George Bush Carrier. Remember in the trailer when the Secretary of Defense said, you gave him an aircraft carrier?

Speaker 6 Well, that was actually true. They gave him the George Bush carrier for Tom Cruise and the rest of the film cast.

Speaker 4 I need you to trust me.

Speaker 6 One last time. So they do routinely support films.
It becomes news when they don't. Platoon, a famous one from like 25 years ago, was one of them.

Speaker 6 They didn't support that. And they didn't support

Speaker 6 Zero Dark 30, the famous movie that Catherine Bigelow made about the killing of Osama bin Laden by SEAL Team 6.

Speaker 7 Bin Laden is there.

Speaker 9 And you're going to kill him for me.

Speaker 6 Zero Dark 30 was kind of the code name for when the operation would take place in Pakistan, Abbottabad, Pakistan.

Speaker 6 A number of organizations were, and members of Congress were a little peeved that the Pentagon helped them or even helped vet their script.

Speaker 6 This is at a time when Secretary Robert Gates was telling the rest of the military, keep your mouth shut about the bin Laden raid.

Speaker 1 So, Tony, how might you interpret what happened here? Why did the Pentagon respond? Why did the Pentagon talk about this at all?

Speaker 6 I got to think they are concerned that Golden Dome will be trashed because of this.

Speaker 1 There's a line in here that says, was this film made in response to the planned Golden Dome project?

Speaker 2 And it says, Please direct all questions related to Golden Dome to the Office of the Secretary of War.

Speaker 6 Which so there was some sensitivity. This wasn't emphasized throughout.
But I think part of it was it showed a miss. And they were worried about an erosion, probably, of U.S.

Speaker 6 confidence of the public about the system that

Speaker 6 nobody's really thinking about at the moment, but to be proactive in terms of if they are asked about the subject.

Speaker 1 Bloomberg's Tony Capaccio. Coming up, the prospect of nuclear war was scary enough, it always has been.
But now, we are actively adding AI to our nuclear infrastructure. How freaked out should we be?

Speaker 1 Support for Today Explained comes from DeleteMe.

Speaker 1 DeleteMe says they make it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data online at a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone, including you, vulnerable.

Speaker 1 How does it work? You can sign up and provide DeleteMe with exactly the information you want deleted. Their experts take it from there.
It's not just a one-time thing.

Speaker 1 Delete Me can constantly monitor and remove personal information you don't want on the internet. Here's Claire White.

Speaker 10 DeleteMe has put me at ease over the last year. I get less spam calls, less spam emails.

Speaker 10 I feel a lot more safe being on the internet because I know that a lot of my information has been scrubbed and it's been scrubbed for a year now.

Speaker 1 CY Wirecutter named Delete Me their top pick for data removal services.

Speaker 1 You can take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me Now at a special discount for our listeners.

Speaker 1 Get 20% off your Delete Me plan when you go to joindeleetme.com/slash today.

Speaker 1 Use the promo code today at checkout. The way to get 20% off is to go to joindeleteme.com/slash today and our code today at checkout.
What's that? That's joinzeleteme.com/slash today, code today.

Speaker 1 Support for Today Explained comes from Select Quote. Perhaps you've been putting off life insurance.
Select quote says you can only put something off for so long before it really matters.

Speaker 1 Select quote says they take the guesswork out of finding the right term life insurance policy. For over 40 years, Select Quote has been one of the most trusted brokers in the insurance business.

Speaker 1 According to Select Quote, they say they've helped more than 2 million Americans secure over $700 billion billion in coverage. You don't have to sort through dozens of confusing options.

Speaker 1 One of their licensed agents will sort through dozens of confusing options to find the right policy at the right price for you. They compare plans from trusted, top-rated insurance companies.

Speaker 1 Select quote works with providers who offer same-day coverage. up to $2 million worth.
Select quote says life insurance is never cheaper than it is today.

Speaker 1 Get the right life insurance for you for less and save more than 50% at selectquote.com slash explain. Save more than 50% on term life insurance at selectquote.com slash explain today to get started.

Speaker 1 What's that? That's selectquote.com slash explained.

Speaker 1 Support for Today Explained comes from Chime. What's Chime? Chime is different.
Chime is a financial technology company that wants you to embrace each and every dollar.

Speaker 1 When you set up direct deposit with QIIME, you can get access to fee-free features like overdraft protection, or they say you can get paid up to two days early and even more.

Speaker 1 Speaking of no fees, Chime says that when you open a checking account with them, there are no monthly fees and and no maintenance fees.

Speaker 1 And with qualifying direct deposits, you can be eligible for free overdraft up to $200 on debit card purchases and cash withdrawals. Not to mention, although I will, 47,000 fee-free ATMs.

Speaker 1 You can work on your financial goals through Chime today. You can open an account in two minutes at chime.com slash explain.
That's chime.com slash explain. Chime feels like progress.

Speaker 11 Chime is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services and debit card provided by the Bankor Bank NA or Stripe Bank NA, members FDIC.

Speaker 11 Spot me eligibility requirements and overdraft limits apply. Timing depends on submission payment file.
Fees apply at Out of Network ATMs, bank ranking, and number of ATMs, according to U.S.

Speaker 11 News and World Report 2023. Time checking account required.

Speaker 11 Listen to this podcast.

Speaker 4 And the guy said,

Speaker 6 This is today explained.

Speaker 4 I'm Josh Keating.

Speaker 4 I'm a senior correspondent at Vox, and for the last few months, I've been working on a fellowship where I'm writing a series of articles on the intersection of AI and nuclear weapons.

Speaker 1 Human beings have had fears around AI and nuclear weapons for as long as we've had AI, I would think. And you see them quite vividly sometimes in movies.

Speaker 12 The system goes online on August 4th, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic defense.
Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2.14 a.m.

Speaker 12 Eastern Time, August 29th.

Speaker 7 General, what you see on these screens up here is a fantasy, a computer-enhanced hallucination. Those blips are not real missiles, they're phantoms.

Speaker 1 Most recently, there's a part in A House of Dynamite where they're trying to figure out what the hell happened and whether AI is involved.

Speaker 1 The Chinese Navy has been experimenting with AI-assisted launch systems, so

Speaker 1 this could be a technical mishap. Are these movies with these fears onto something?

Speaker 4 Well, I mean, I think the interesting thing about movies when it comes to nuclear war is this is a kind of war that's never been fought. We don't have real-world examples of it.

Speaker 4 There are no sort of veterans of nuclear wars other than, you know, the two bombs we dropped on Japan, which is a very different scenario.

Speaker 4 And so I think like that movies have always played a kind of outsized role in debates over nuclear weapons.

Speaker 4 You can go back to the 60s when you know the Strategic Air Command actually like produced its own rebuttal to Doctor Strangelove and and FailSafe and movies like that.

Speaker 7 You yourself have flown profile missions over and over again, but there is one area in which you've had little or no actual experience. Nuclear effects.

Speaker 4 In the 80s, the TV movie

Speaker 4 The Day After was kind of a galvanizing force for the nuclear freeze movement and President Reagan apparently was like very disturbed when he watched it and it influenced his thinking on arms control with the Soviet Union.

Speaker 4 And in the specific topic I'm looking at, which is AI and nuclear weapons, I think there's been a surprising number of movies that have that as the plot.

Speaker 4 And it comes up a lot in the policy debates over this. I mean, I've had people who are advocates for integrating AI into the nuclear command system saying, look, this isn't going to be Skynet.

Speaker 4 And they're referring to the

Speaker 4 computer system that takes over in the Terminator movies. And it was actually General Anthony Cotton, who's the current commander of Strategic Command,

Speaker 4 the branch of the military responsible for the nuclear weapons. He also advocates

Speaker 4 greater use of AI tools, but he referred to the 1983 movie War Games, where there's a computer system called Whopper that

Speaker 4 accidentally almost starts a nuclear war. And he said, look, we're going to have more AI, but there's not going to be a Whopper in Strategic Command.
So where I think it falls a a little short is

Speaker 4 the fear tends to be that a super intelligent AI is going to take over our nuclear weapons and use it to wipe us out. You know, for now, that's a theoretical concern.

Speaker 4 What I think is the more real concern is that as AI gets into more and more parts of the command and control system, like do the human beings in charge of the decisions to make nuclear weapons really understand how the AIs are working and how is it going to affect the way they make these decisions, which could be, you know, not exaggerating to say, some of the most important decisions ever made in human history?

Speaker 1 Josh, answer that question. Do the human beings working on nukes understand the AI?

Speaker 4 We don't know exactly where AI is in the nuclear enterprise.

Speaker 4 You know, computers have been part of this from the beginning. I mean, some of the first digital computers ever developed were used during the building of the atomic bomb in the Manhattan Project.

Speaker 4 But I think people will be surprised to know how low-tech the nuclear command and control system really was. Up until 2019, they were using floppy disks for their communication systems.

Speaker 4 And I'm not even talking about the little plastic ones that look like your save icon on Windows. I mean, the old 80s bendy ones, like they were using those in their command and control system.

Speaker 4 So, you know, there's reasons for that because they don't... they want these systems to be secure from outside cyber interference.

Speaker 4 So they don't want everything like hooked up to the cloud for very obvious reasons.

Speaker 4 But, you know, as you know, there's this ongoing multi-billion dollar nuclear modernization process underway, a big part of that is updating these systems.

Speaker 4 And multiple commanders of Stratcom, including a couple I talked to, said they think AI should be part of this.

Speaker 4 What they all say is that AI should not be in charge of making the decision as to whether, you know, we launch nuclear weapons.

Speaker 4 They think that AI can just analyze analyze massive amounts of information and do it much faster than people can.

Speaker 4 And if you've seen House of Dynamite, one thing that movie shows really well is how quickly the president and senior advisors are going to have to make some

Speaker 4 absolutely extraordinary difficult decisions.

Speaker 4 And so AI can help provide options and help take the decisions the humans don't have to make out of their hands and leave humans in charge of making the really important ones.

Speaker 1 Okay, so that brings us to a thing that makes everybody nervous,

Speaker 1 which is

Speaker 1 AI being integrated, more integrated.

Speaker 1 You told us about some of the pros, and truthfully, an indecisive president or a president that has to make a decision real fast, being helped by something, that's a very good point.

Speaker 1 What are the big arguments against getting AI and nukes in bed together?

Speaker 4 Well, I mean, part of it is like even the best AI models that we have available today are still prone to error. You know, another worry is that there could be outside interference with these systems.

Speaker 4 It could be hacking or a cyber attack, or, you know, foreign governments could come up with ways to sort of seed inaccurate information into the model.

Speaker 4 There has been reporting that, you know, Russian propaganda networks are actively trying to seed disinformation

Speaker 4 into the training data used by Western consumer AI chatbots.

Speaker 4 And another is just like how people interact with these systems.

Speaker 4 I mean there is a phenomenon that a lot of researchers have pointed out called automation bias, which is just that people tend to trust to

Speaker 4 a remarkable extent the information that automated systems, the computer systems, are giving them. There are abundant examples from history of times when

Speaker 4 technology has actually led to near nuclear disasters and it's been humans who've stepped in

Speaker 4 to

Speaker 4 prevent escalation. And so there was a case in 1979 when Spignyev Grzezinski, the U.S.

Speaker 4 National Security Advisor, was actually woken up by a phone call in the middle of the night informing him that hundreds of missiles had just been launched from Soviet submarines off the coast of Oregon.

Speaker 4 And just before he was about to call Jimmy Carter, the president at the time, to to wake him up and tell him America was under attack, there was another call that had been a false alarm.

Speaker 9 For six minutes this morning, the signals from the North American Air Defense Command headquarters indicated a nuclear attack against the United States. It was a false alarm.

Speaker 9 The cause reported this evening, a computer error.

Speaker 4 A few years later, there was a very famous case in the Soviet Union. There was a colonel named Stanislav Petrov

Speaker 4 who was working in

Speaker 4 their sort of missile detection infrastructure, who was informed by the computer system that there had been a U.S. nuclear launch.

Speaker 4 And, you know, under the protocols, he was supposed to then inform his superiors, who might have ordered immediate retaliation, as their doctrine would have required them to.

Speaker 4 But it turned out the system had misinterpreted sunlight reflecting off clouds as a missile launch.

Speaker 4 And so that was a case where it's very good that Stanislav Fetrov took the decision to wait a few minutes and confirm that before he called his superiors.

Speaker 1 Yeah, it sounds, I mean, I'm listening through to those examples.

Speaker 1 And the thing I might take away, if I'm thinking about it really simplistically, is that human beings pull us back from the brink when technology screws up.

Speaker 4 It's true. And I think it's, there's some really interesting recent tests on AI models given sort of military crisis scenarios.

Speaker 4 And they actually tend to be more hawkish than human decision makers are.

Speaker 4 You know, and we don't know exactly why that is.

Speaker 4 I mean, one thing I think about is that, like, if we look at why we haven't fought a nuclear war, why, you know, 80 years after Hiroshima, we haven't, nobody's dropped another atomic bomb, why there's never been a nuclear exchange on the battlefield, I think part of it is just like how terrifying it is, how like humans understand the destructive potential of these weapons and what this escalation can lead to, that, you know, that there are certain steps that may have unintended consequences and fear is a big part of it.

Speaker 4 And so, you know, from my perspective, I think we want to make sure that there's fear built into the system, that

Speaker 4 intelligences, entities that are capable of being absolutely freaked out by the destructive potential of nuclear weapons are the ones who are making the key decisions on whether to use them.

Speaker 1 It does sound like, you know, watching a house of dynamite, you can, as I did last night, vividly think perhaps we should get all of the AI out of this entirely, Just like, just like, let's not have any mistakes.

Speaker 1 Let's have any accidents. It sounds like what you're saying is we may have reached a point at which we are not going back in time.

Speaker 1 AI is a part of nuclear infrastructure for us, for other nations, and it is likely to be that way.

Speaker 4 Well, it's interesting.

Speaker 4 One thing one sort of advocate for more automation told me, he was like, if you don't think humans can build a trustworthy AI, then humans have no business with nuclear weapons.

Speaker 4 And,

Speaker 4 you know, I think he's kind of right.

Speaker 4 But the thing is, like, I think that

Speaker 4 that's a statement that people who think we should eliminate all nuclear weapons entirely would also agree with.

Speaker 4 I think I may have got into this worry that AI was going to take over and take over nuclear weapons, but I realized like maybe, but like right now I'm worried enough about like what people are going to do with nuclear weapons and the risk that, you know, it's not that that AI is going to kill people with nuclear weapons, it's that AIs might make it more likely that people kill each other with nuclear weapons.

Speaker 4 And so,

Speaker 4 you know, to a degree, like the AI is the least of our worries. Like,

Speaker 4 the real thing we should be concerned about is that we have these weapons at all. And that, as I think the movie shows well, just like

Speaker 4 how

Speaker 4 absurd the scenario in which we'd have to decide whether or not to use them really is.

Speaker 1 Josh Keating. You can find his reporting at Vox.com.
Josh's reporting on this one was supported by the Outrider Foundation and journalism funding partners.

Speaker 1 Kelly Wessinger produced today's episode, Jolie Myers Edited, Laura Bullard and Abhishai Artsy checked the facts, and Patrick Boyd and Adrian Lilly engineered.

Speaker 1 The Vox membership sale, you should know, is still ongoing. Ad-free podcast folks, other perks too.
Good on you if you've taken advantage of the sale.

Speaker 1 And thank you to the person who said they signed up for the Today Explained hosts. Our boss reads those messages, so we appreciate it.
Vox.com/slash members to take advantage of the sale.

Speaker 1 I'm Noelle King, it's Today Explained.

Speaker 13 Fifth Third Bank's commercial payments are fast and efficient, but they're not just fast and efficient. They're also powered by the latest in payments technology built to evolve with your business.

Speaker 13 Fifth Third Bank has the big bank muscle to handle payments for businesses of any size, but they also have the FinTech hustle that got them named one of America's most innovative companies by Fortune magazine.

Speaker 13 That's what being a Fifth Third Better is all about. It's about about not being just one thing, but many things for our customers.
Big bank muscle, fintech hustle.

Speaker 13 That's your commercial payments, a fifth third better.

Speaker 3 Nobody knows your customers better than your team, so give them the power to make standout content with Adobe Express.

Speaker 3 Brand kits make following design rules a breeze, and Adobe quality templates make it easy to create pro-looking flyers, social posts, presentations, and more.

Speaker 3 You don't have to be a designer to edit campaigns, resize ads, and translate content. Anyone can in a click.
And collaboration tools put feedback right where you need it.

Speaker 3 See how you can turn your team into a content machine with Adobe Express, the quick and easy app to create on-brand content. Learn more at adobe.com/slash express/slash business.