No. The government should have multiple cloud providers.
No. They should run almost everything in-house so it can be properly integrated.
Like they do now? That hasn't worked out so hot for integration...
It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
121–130 of 156 posts
Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
#122My take on this whole thing, is the Amazon basically wrote the entire scope...so they just thought they were going to win because only they would meet it (this was a bit of a scandal just a few months back.) They bid high, and then they lost. Now they are mad that their lobbying wasn't a 100% success, so they are suing. It's all so very Amazon.
Btw, this is a widely known practice (not sure if it's legally accepted though). Government contractors often play a big role in shaping the RFI/RFP requirements. This is a multi-year process that involves socializing, discovering the legacy/obsolete systems in client environment, learning about their business side, identifying pain points in the gov customer side, etc. Big contractors like Raytheon, CACI, SAIC have a well-defined and stream-lined process for this. This is where smaller contractors or startups find it very difficult to get into gov contracting because they don't have the kind of access that Raytheon/CACI has. So, I don't see any surprise in AWS giving inputs for shaping DoD requirements.
Cutting all the politics and legalities, is n't AWS superior to Azure? I guess Azure's major revenue is still from MS-office subscriptions, but AWS is more battled hardened, more reliable and has more variety of services than Azure. At least, that's my perception.
Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
When JEDI was first proposed, AWS had already been the vast majority of cloud services for the Intelligence community. This led to them having a distinct advantage because they already had the certified infrastructure to handle US Secret and Top Secret information. This was (in my own thoughts) why that immediate capability was stressed so much in the initial request for proposal.
The intelligence community uses SIPRNet or JWICS, not AWS that can be breached by some dev-ops as evidenced by the capital one incident.
> The intelligence community uses SIPRNet or JWICS ...
... and AWS GovCloud [0].
---
[0]: https://aws.amazon.com/government-education/government/
Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
>And running a newspaper that continuously annoys a President doesn't really fit the apparently popular idea that Bezos is spending money to get favourable treatment from politicians. At least from outward appearances, most of the ruling class and permanent government isn't particularly fond of the current President.
That's what our current President and his "deep state" wants you to believe. However, after three + years it's pretty obvious that our President has a firm grip on power. He still plays the victim every once in a while. But all the departments are quite clearly bowing and pleasing him as best they can.
> He still plays the victim every once in a while.
Try continuously. Every problem is someone else's fault, and every success is solely because of him.
Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reasons he gives for buying it don't tell us anything. His net worth is in the 12 figures. Everything he says publicly is crafted by a well paid and highly competent PR team. If he bought it to gain political influence, which seems to me the only reason that makes any sense whatsoever, or for any other reason that would put him in a bad light, he would not in a million years come out and say that openly.
No idea why you're getting downvoted. This is the guy who refuses to pay his shareholders a dividend, or his employees more than he absolutely has to. He didn't buy a newspaper because he loves giving money away on good causes.
> This is the guy who refuses to pay his shareholders a dividend
Amazons share price has grown 136,000% in the past 23 years or 36.8% per year. That is far above S&P 500 returns and the exact case for when you want a company reinvesting in themself instead of paying out dividends.
Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
#126"Microsoft won the JEDI contract because the Department of Defense found that we offered “significantly superior” technology at a better price."
Umm.. what? Are they mentally impaired?
I recently tried doing something very simple - use the QnA Maker. You should check it out for yourself - the number of clicks needed to do something as simple as this makes me question all the comments I see these days that say "Azure is as good as AWS".
No, it is not. It is a lot more complex for simple tasks, and looks like it has been assembled together by a bunch of monkeys.
Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is, quite simply, a confession. That's like saying pleading the 5th is a confession...
It's not a trial, it's the public asking their government to tell them what's going on in this matter. And the government flatly refused. From this, it's absolutely reasonable for the public to think its government is hiding something now. And it's an order to _others_ in the DoD to remain silent. If it were a trial, this is ordering potential witnesses to remain silent on threat of termination. What the White House…
There are other reasons, inside government, to maintain privileged information, e.g. 'legitimate secrets' and of course to protect precedent. You don't want to burn down those principles for just anything.
Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
#128[deleted]
Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. They should run almost everything in-house so it can be properly integrated.
Like they do now? That hasn't worked out so hot for integration...
Not like they do now. If it was, you and I would know more about it because the infra would be required to be open source public domain
Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. They should run almost everything in-house so it can be properly integrated.
Isn't the usual business of government to rotate every 5-10 years? - In house is the way to go! - No the pervious administration was wrong - outsourcing is the way to go Lather, rinse, repeat
With anything relating to advance technology I think the systematic outsourcing has been prevalent since at least WWII.