Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#401

Post by bilbo0s » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:05 PM UTC

tozeur wrote: post #172

bilbo0s wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just speculation, but I'm thinking, just like with New York, Bezos and Amazon are happy to be rid of JEDI. Too much politics for 10 bill in revenue easily made up elsewhere in the world. They just seemed to let go of New York and JEDI wayyy too easily for being one of the wealthiest companies in the world. When someone like that bows out of such large projects so easily, something's off. And I have to take it at face…

Politics? Amazon already serves the CIA so that probably wouldn’t be a con. 10B is a massive contract. Ask Frank Underwood says: When the tits are that big, everybody gets in line.

The CIA is not politics though. Politics require highlighting. You'd be surprised how little the CIA highlights of what it's doing, and what that costs. Contrasted against the military, which tends to highlight almost everything of what it's doing, and what that costs.

And 10 billion over 10 years is what? Maybe 3 to 5% of Amazon's yearly revenue? You really want to be at the epicenter of the shitstorm that will happen if the project goes over budget and you still haven't delivered anything anyone in the DoD actually uses? (Maybe I shouldn't have said "if the project goes over" but "when"?) Especially being a big tech firm nowadays?

And you're gonna step into all that unnecessary drama for access to a 10 year / 10 billion project?

I don't think so. Not for a billion a year in revenue when you're already sitting at over 230 billion a year in revenue. (Or even just the over 30 billion a year that AWS alone is sitting at.)

Admit it man, politics being what they are these days, particularly for big tech firms, it's just not worth it.

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#402

Post by bilbo0s » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:09 PM UTC

gzer0 wrote: post #135

p0rkbelly wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is for sure a lot. AWS wants it. Everyone wants it. But, it is a maximum of $10Billion ...over 10 years. Th at is the key thing to focus on. I'm sure both companies have private sector customers right now that pay a quarter to half-billion a year right now. I think the greater damage is optics vs financial..and optics can cost a lot. Let's say AWS makes $30-Billion this year. So, losing $1-billion this year is 3.3…

It's not only about the $10 billion. Microsoft has essentially cemented being the cloud provider for the Pentagon for the foreseeable future. Once all of the pentagon is integrated with Azure, after the 10 years are up, it will be very unlikely for Pentagon to want to switch, not only due to costs, but everyone will have been trained specifically for handling Azure. This gives Microsoft a massive lead in terms of gov…

Yeah, but if MS wants that headache, why not let them have it?

Politics nowadays are just way too unpredictable and destructive. Just best not to be anywhere near it when, say, cost overruns on this project happen and you still haven't delivered anything the DoD is actually using.

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#403

Post by vonmoltke » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:16 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #45

tozeur wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand the repulsive feelings towards helping the govt. Would we rather have the people in control of the military and our troops use out-of-date tech?

I would rather the military be less capable, because its current capability is being used for offensive, not defensive purposes. If it's less capable, it's less likely to get embroiled in stupid imperialistic adventures. Edit: I don't understand why so many people are, at the same time, so enthused by the idea of starving government (Because they think most of its services are a waste of money), while at the same tim…

> insisting on spending more on the military than the rest of the world combined.

While the US military expenditures are ridiculously high, they're only ~34% of worldwide expenditures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_...

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#404

Post by sehugg » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:25 PM UTC

In a book slated for publication Oct. 29, retired Navy commander Guy Snodgrass, who served as a speech writer to former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, said Trump called Mattis and directed him to “screw Amazon” by preventing it from bidding on the JEDI contract, according to an excerpt of the book seen by Reuters ahead of its release.

“Were not going to do that,” Mattis later told other Pentagon officials, according to the excerpt. “This will be done by the book, both legally and ethically.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/25/reuters-america-update-5-mic...

Mattis resigned December 2018, his successor put Amazon's contract up for review in August.

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#405

Post by specialist » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:33 PM UTC

SllX wrote: post #138

techsupporter wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a native Texan, it's weird for a few reasons: a) Pragmatically, separating from the rest of the United States would be devastating to our economy. Much like the United Kingdom from the EU, but on a much larger scale, because the vast majority of our trade, people, and connectedness come from being part of the U.S. Texans like to trot out the factoid that relatively little land in Texas is owned by the federal gove…

As a non-Texan, I would like to ask more about point B. I myself am increasingly of the opinion that while government, national and State (I’m a Californian) has a role, it has unfortunately carved out too big of a chunk and allocated itself too many roles, often on the most specious of arguments. The idea of a legislature that meets infrequently, and where politician is a hat, not a job title, actually looks pretty…

Who fills the vacuum?

I now think elected politicians should be full time, full paid, professional service workers, with fully staffed offices.

Before, I was for term limits. Until I started lobbying on my pet issue. Watching the grizzled, wily bureaucrats run circles around the part-time amateur politicians was illuminating. Whereas the longer serving electeds had enough experience, knowledge to hold the bureaucrats accountable.

I know almost nothing about Texas, or its government. But its drive-by policy making concerns me. I'd rather have my elected representatives sitting on the levers of power, keenly aware of what's what.

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#406

Post by specialist » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:36 PM UTC

sterlind wrote: post #185

techsupporter wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given our respective points of origin, I don't know if I'll be able to give you an explanation that will be satisfactory, but I'll try. First, the Texas government was designed, post-Reconstruction, to give as little authority as possible to the state government and to move government as close to the citizens as possible. That's all well and good. Had we stuck with that model, I would have few complaints, but we didn…

I'm very much on the left, but I can see a benefit to the sunset bill, as a heartbeat to ensure liveness of the legislature. Congress has been profoundly gridlocked this decade, but they absolutely must keep reauthorizing the budget, or the nation grinds to a halt. Although we've had a few short government shutdowns caused by this, passing a budget has been effective at forcing all parties to sit down and vote togeth…

Am also on the left. Huge fan of expiration dates.

I now have near religious reverence for the internet's notion of renewable leases.

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#407

Post by 75dvtwin » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:42 PM UTC

noelsusman wrote: post #391

75dvtwin wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10s of millions of people in US think that Wash Post is colluding with coup orchestrators, trying to overthrow constitutionally elected US president. With the above sentiment, giving Wash Post owner a 10 bln dollar Gov contract for work with military -- would have be borderline absurd. It is difficult to separate these types of discussion from political bias of commenters, but you would have to create your own views…

It's a lot more absurd to make government contract decisions based on newspaper coverage the president doesn't like.

I agree that Bezos's/ Wash Post disposition relative to the anti-President coup, likely had to be important consideration.

As I noted, 10s of millions of tax payers consider Washington Post is not a newspaper, but a propaganda agent actively involved in to the coup attempt against a constitutionally elected President of US.

Just chucking it of to 'president does not like a news paper' -- is diluting the tremendous affects these things have on the well-being of the country and its citizens, and, (given US position in the world stage) , on the rest of the world.

Additionally, anti-president spying and evidence manufacturing was, in part, orchestrated by leaking to these 'newspapers' and then referencing the generated articles as 'potential evidence' that warrants the investigation.

(eg, leaking the dossier [1] and other fabrications through news organizations )

Some think the anti-president coup attempt in US, is good for the country and for the world.

Some do not.

That probably, defines a big part of person's view, where they stand on awarding contract to AWS vs MS.

(Unless there is tremendous technical evidence that MSs offer will not be competent compared to AWS, or that financial burden on tax budget will be enormously different)

[1] https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/fisa-memo-scarier-wat...

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#408

Post by specialist » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:45 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #335

techsupporter wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could, but the thing I think you and the others who are replying to say "but what about..." are not fully considering is just how tight the entanglements are even though Texans don't seem to want to acknowledge them. 174 years of trade, legal, cultural, financial, and infrastructure policy would be astoundingly difficult to untangle. Given that any business of any size currently operating in Texas would have 51 (i…

> The United States military has such a large presence in Texas because the United States Military is such a large organization, generally. There would be no reason for Texas to have such a comparatively large military, nor, I think, would an independent Texas be able to afford one. Texans already pay the federal taxes that purportedly fund the US military, though. I’m not sure if the US has more military assets in T…

Texas is a slight net beneficiary of federal largess. Quick googling found this table. Couldn't find more recent numbers, though another article says as of 2019, Texas now ranks #25. So middle of the pack.

https://taxfoundation.org/federal-taxes-paid-vs-federal-spen...

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#409

Post by jburwell » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:47 PM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #401

tozeur wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politics? Amazon already serves the CIA so that probably wouldn’t be a con. 10B is a massive contract. Ask Frank Underwood says: When the tits are that big, everybody gets in line.

The CIA is not politics though. Politics require highlighting. You'd be surprised how little the CIA highlights of what it's doing, and what that costs. Contrasted against the military, which tends to highlight almost everything of what it's doing, and what that costs. And 10 billion over 10 years is what? Maybe 3 to 5% of Amazon's yearly revenue? You really want to be at the epicenter of the shitstorm that will happ…

You must contend with politics working for USG at any level for any department/agency. There are plenty of very nasty, bitter politics within each of the intelligence agencies, as well as, across the larger intelligence community (IC). These are massive organizations with very large budgets. Because these battles occur in classified settings, they are not visible to the public. I highly doubt that AWS hasn't had to content with a myriad of political battles within CIA, not the least of which being, groups within the CIA who remain skeptical about "cloud" and trusting a third-party with their data.

Re: Microsoft Wins Pentagon’s $10B Contract

#410

Post by jburwell » Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 3:58 PM UTC

empath75 wrote: post #80

bilbo0s wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just speculation, but I'm thinking, just like with New York, Bezos and Amazon are happy to be rid of JEDI. Too much politics for 10 bill in revenue easily made up elsewhere in the world. They just seemed to let go of New York and JEDI wayyy too easily for being one of the wealthiest companies in the world. When someone like that bows out of such large projects so easily, something's off. And I have to take it at face…

They made a lot of noise about building a new hq in Arlington. I can’t imagine they’re going to build it out at any scale now.

I live about 2 miles away. I can tell you that not only have they been building it out at a prodigious pace (they had people were working in Crystal City by the end of 1Q2019). They have signed construction contracts, leases, extended offers to employees, etc. They are committed to it now.

Also, Amazon has a tremendous footprint here already. Their largest region is located in Ashburn (~25 miles east), CIA is roughly 5 miles for Crystal City, Herndon and Ballston have large AWS sales/engineering offices, and Richmond (roughly 1.5 hours south) hosts one of their largest distribution centers on the east coast. In short, they were committed to this area long before HQ2, let alone JEDI. They cannot be happy about losing the contract award, but it was only one of many things Amazon/AWS are going in NoVA.