Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 310 posts

Re: Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

#101

Post by benja123 »

fwip wrote: post #33
paxys wrote: post #4

People on the ground never have use for such tech. These deals are all political and the actual equipment arrives by the truckloads and sits unboxed. When people rant about ridiculous military budgets and spending it isn't about cutting soldiers' salaries but shit like this.

The army has a little under 500K active-duty soldiers. As a gross overestimation, if they were delivering one headset per soldier, napkin math shows: $22B / 500K = $44K per headset. Even if the tech were super useful and every single soldier got one, that price tag seems absolutely absurd. How can anyone be okay with this?

If the US army wants to supply one to every soldier then they will need much more than 500K units.

Military equipment breaks all the time and it’s not because of poor build quality, it is constantly being put through the most extreme conditions possible. Conditions that are hard to imagine as a civilian.

Re: Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

#102

Post by proc0 »

paxys wrote: post #4

People on the ground never have use for such tech. These deals are all political and the actual equipment arrives by the truckloads and sits unboxed. When people rant about ridiculous military budgets and spending it isn't about cutting soldiers' salaries but shit like this.

Let's not forget how the Internet started. Maybe a huge portion of the military is relatively low tech, but they're definitely on the cutting edge (probably have to).

Re: Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

#103

Post by w0m »

blunte wrote: post #34
judge2020 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it helps, I doubt the contract forbids MS from using any of its R&D on other projects, ie. Hololens 3/a consumer edition hololens.

I just watched a not-incredibly-terrible Russian (English overdub) Netflix war film that featured a Boston Robotics dog with a mounted gun. Maybe it was a fake (probably). Either way, it's a bit like selling your sister into prostitution but agreeing that you all get some financial benefits. It's not how humanity should progress.

It is how humanity has (in large part) progressed though unfortunately. Not sure when or how we can ~ever expect that to change, raw capitalism doesn't have the right motivations.

Re: Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

#104

Post by savanaly »

trentnix wrote: post #42
high_priest wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life is one big war. Just because you live in a pleasant neighbourhood, doesn't mean there are no malevolent people in the world...

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. - commonly attributed to Orwell

...But only because there are other rough men ready to violence against them. What was proposed was getting rid of rough men willing to do violence, not rough men willing to do violence on our side only.

Re: Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

#105

Post by datavirtue »

hutzlibu wrote: post #97
datavirtue wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I imagine what the possibilities would be if we funded general non-military projects with the kind of money that goes into the military." Amen. China is. They are building a new silk road that they will control. What's our answer? A bomb?

So china does not have a big military budget, too?

Yes! AND strategies for innovation and trade that are well underway.

Re: Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

#106

Post by verdverm »

ryanmarsh wrote: post #35
remarkEon wrote: post #3

Anyone work this technology and can talk about it (without breaking whatever NDA of course)? I'm a former infantryman and ... let's just say I'm _extremely_ skeptical of this kind of technology for all but the most niche use-cases (think, AR for the driver in the hole of the truck). Obviously for pilots stuff similar to this has been around for a while, but the article is not really clear about how exactly this would…

Infantry here too, I think it would be cool for the TC to have the blue force tracker, maps, and any other sensors available in a heads up display. Also, seems like a no-brainer for tankers. I do not want to carry this shit on a patrol though.

HL2 consumer version weighs less than 1lb and will likely be built directly into your helmet. Might get to 1lb for extended battery life

Re: Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

#108

Post by intrepidhero »

trentnix wrote: post #42
high_priest wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life is one big war. Just because you live in a pleasant neighbourhood, doesn't mean there are no malevolent people in the world...

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. - commonly attributed to Orwell

I strongly disagree.

If some level of violence is necessary to ensure peace, the people entrusted with the power to inflict said violence should be compassionate and wise humans not, "rough men".

And at the same time we should be putting our resources to work at lowering that necessary level of violence.

Re: Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

#109

Post by Diederich »

remarkEon wrote: post #92
Enginerrrd wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm inclined to agree. While it might be nice in theory to have your battlefield painted with where the friendlies are or something, there are so many issues with that in practice I can't imagine it actually getting used by infantry. Just off the top: All the electronics shit is gonna add weight, bulk, and power requirements. It's gonna get dirty, fogs up, w/e. It's gonna not work for one reason or another b/c it can…

I agree with all of this. I'll add one more: so much of what platoon leaders do now is teach about technology. There's only so many hours in the day for training, and (even back in 2013!) the load was starting to cause deficiency in basic combat tasks. We just didn't have the time between all the requirements to get everyone proficient in the myriad of sensor tech we ended up carrying. Plus, if it's possible to break…

> myriad of sensor tech we ended up carrying

At that time, did you feel like that tech was useful?

Re: Microsoft wins $21.9B contract with U.S. Army to supply AR headsets

#110

Post by LatteLazy »

After the 7/7 bombings on the tube, people wearing earbuds or headphones showed much less hearing damage. Given the nature of battlefields anything that protects the ear seems like an easy sell to me.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/earphones-may-have-saved-...

Post reply on HN