21–30 of 56 posts
What an unbelievably transparent appeal to peoples' emotions. It's a "dangerous precedent" to use somebody other than AWS? And this is all Trump's fault somehow? I mean my god. Is Russia involved somehow?
I don't care about the contract one way or the other way. What I do object to is the use of the word Jedi in this context. Somehow it feels like defiling of a favorite memory.
From the AWS blog post [0]. > This time, AWS offered a lower cost by several tens of millions of dollars. On a contract worth $10bn does tens of millions really make a difference? [0] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/publicsector/jedi-why-we-will-c...
In government contracting, if cost is supposedly the formal deciding criteria, yes.
The allegation isn't that the cost amount was significant as a value amount, but that it's one of many examples raised of the DoD allegedly making decisions for which pretexts are offered that are inconsistent with the facts.
The laws of government contracting don't allow the kind of arbitrarily moving goalposts that Amazon’s description of the DoD behavior would indicate, and the reason it doesn't is as a safeguard against corrupt political favoritism with contracts as patronage.
Focussing on whether the cost qua cost is significant in isolation is focussing is missing the forest for the trees.
Can someone tell me if I’ve summed this up right? - Amazon colludes behind the scenes to get a contract proposal that on paper only Amazon can fill (e.g. memory sizing options exactly matching things only AWS provides) - There is a competitive bidding process without prices revealed and Microsoft wins - Amazon cries no fair and demands to be allowed to bid again now that they know how much Microsoft bid - Government…
Did you read the AWS blog post? [1] You are missing a massive part of the story. They are accusing the president of interfering in a public procurement process because of his personal dislike of Bezos/Amazon. [1] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/publicsector/jedi-why-we-will-c...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you read the AWS blog post? [1] You are missing a massive part of the story. They are accusing the president of interfering in a public procurement process because of his personal dislike of Bezos/Amazon. [1] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/publicsector/jedi-why-we-will-c...
Did you read his post? Amazon rigged the selection criteria in their favor.
Amazon should probably be broken up and it's whining about losing out on a multi billion dollar government contract.
Wondering if anyone in these comments actually read the post. They are making a legitimate point about an unfair public procurement process that the president interfered in for personal reasons. > There is a recurring pattern to the way President Trump behaves when he’s called out for doing something egregious: first he denies doing it, then he looks for ways to push it off to the side, to distract attention from it…
What an unbelievably transparent appeal to peoples' emotions. It's a "dangerous precedent" to use somebody other than AWS? And this is all Trump's fault somehow? I mean my god. Is Russia involved somehow?
Russia is involved in so far as DJT is raging at Bezos due to journalism in the Washington Post about his Russian schenigans. Wapo is owned by Boezos who also runs Amazon. So yes, involved.
Wondering if anyone in these comments actually read the post. They are making a legitimate point about an unfair public procurement process that the president interfered in for personal reasons. > There is a recurring pattern to the way President Trump behaves when he’s called out for doing something egregious: first he denies doing it, then he looks for ways to push it off to the side, to distract attention from it…