Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft CEO Defends Pentagon Contract Following Employee Outcry (theverge.com)
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella is defending the company's $479 million contract with the Pentagon to supply augmented reality headsets to the U.S. military. "We made a principled decision that we're not going to withhold technology from institutions that we have elected in democracies to protect the freedoms we enjoy," he told CNN Business at Mobile World Congress. "We were very transparent about that decision and we'll continue to have that dialogue [with employees]," he added during the exclusive interview. From the report: Microsoft was awarded the contract to supply "Integrated Visual Augmentation System" prototypes to the U.S. military in November. The company could eventually deliver over 100,000 headsets under the contract. Microsoft's HoloLens augmented reality technology allows users to see the world around them, but with virtual graphics overlaid. The Israeli military, which has taken delivery of some HoloLens headsets, says the technology can be used to help commanders visualize the battlefield and field medics to consult doctors. According to procurement documents, the U.S. military is seeking a single platform that provides its forces with "increased lethality, mobility and situational awareness" in combat. Microsoft employees have recently circulated a letter addressed to Nadella and Brad Smith, the company's president and chief legal officer, arguing that the company should not supply its HoloLens technology to the U.S. military. "It's not about taking arbitrary action by a single company, it's not about 50 people or 100 people or even 100,000 people in a company," he said. "It's really about being a responsible corporate citizen in a democracy."
How about a source that doesn't abuse YouTube's copyright system to cover their incompetence? Here's one: https://www.engadget.com/2019/...
For context: https://hardware.slashdot.org/...
(I guess I don't know that Engadget hasn't ever misbehaved, but Vox and The Verge are pretty regularly obnoxious.)
If it wasn't for the armed forces investing lots of money in this stuff in the last 3/4 of a century most of you kiddies wouldn't have a job today except maybe factory work
Intel started making memory chips for Minuteman missiles
the internet and everything around it was originally a DoD program to build a network that could survive a nuclear war
CPU development was originally financed by the military
The ENIAC was built to calculate artillery fire tables
NASA was a civilian program to build ballistic missiles that just happened to buy lots of then new mainframes
DARPA funded the original AI and machine learning research as part of the war in Afghanistan.
the US military was one of Microsoft's first customers and even used Windows and SQL server on ships in the 90's.
The Army was buying tens of thousands of Exchange and office licenses in the 90's.
This is what is really going on. The tech industry has taken up all the best workers who did not want to devote their lives to murder machines, killing men, women, children, kittens and puppies and anything else they can mange and mutilate to destruction.
M$ has nothing much left in consumer appeal so is going down the death machine route, taking up their role in the mass extinction of humanity. Work for them and you might as well be working for any other mass murder manufacturer.
This is bad news for M$ products, they will lose the best and get the rest, so you can expect a steady deterioration in the quality of their product. High end people with a conscience will simply not work for them, they will be stuck with unimaginative anal retentive third raters and that spells doom for the company.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
imperialists meddling in foreign countries cause oil and wmd's. ftfy
Did Microsoft just refer to the Department of Defense as an "institution we elected"?
Because I'm pretty sure that's not quite how it works.
Money talks.
"We made a principled decision that we're not going to withhold technology from institutions that we have elected in democracies to protect the freedoms we enjoy,"
What about institutions that got elected through gerrymandering in oligarchies to protect profits for oil barons at the expense of human lives, especially in the middle east but also all over the planet? Asking for 7.53 billion friends.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The alternative is giving this contract to one of your more traditional defense contractors, who is probably going to charge a lot more and deliver a significantly worse product. Oh, it'll also be late and grossly over budget, if it happens at all. And when all is said and done, they might procure Microsoft hardware anyways... as some component of their system that the news doesn't report on.
It's really about being a responsible corporate citizen in a democracy
If it was about democracy, they would be voting for a new government.
Instead they're trying to deny the department of defense technology that could save American soldiers lives.
Few people want war but ignoring reality by pretending there is no International threat is wilful ignorance deserving of punishment. These are our lives and the lives of our allies around the world that depend heavily upon advanced military technologies.
The only thing holding back Russia and China is U.S. military power and this is waning -- and this isn't working so well, as of late.. Russia now holds tanks with longer shooting and driving range, more speed, and greatly superior armor.. Russia holds exceptional surface to air defense capabilities. China seems to think it holds military comparability and is pushing the limits with its claim on control of the entire South China sea and the 1/3rd of the worlds commerce that flows through it..
North Korea continues and has recently expanding its production of nuclear ICBMs, under the cover of peace talks..
War -- even world war -- is closer than it has ever been since the end of the last one. The era of peace we've enjoyed for so long is likely to soon end. Keeping it depends on advancing capabilities rapidly... Not doing so is murder far greater than anything you've mentioned.
If it wasn't for the armed forces investing lots of money in this stuff in the last 3/4 of a century most of you kiddies wouldn't have a job today except maybe factory work
I'm a farmer. What did they invent for me again? Farmers were here before there was even a US, or a military. You know? The people that feed the military.
... to not bother applying will be one of the outcomes.
The real question is, is it an intended outcome?
Maybe companies make pronouncements like this to "encourage" people they see as rabble-rousers to leave or never sign on in the first place.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
... to know who's H1B renewal applications won't need sponsoring.
The employees should remain, and sabotage the project from within. It's Microsoft, remember. Fucking up in random and creative ways is their speciality. It won't look at all suspicious if random bugs and failures make this a money pit that never delivers a working product.
the Military was just the excuse used to get the wealthy to let themselves be taxed so we could pay for it to be developed.
I've got a crazy idea: how about we have modern civilization without a Military Industrial Complex by just taxing the rich whether they like it or not?
Also, are you suggesting the Army was responsible for the horror that is Microsoft Exchange and Office? Best argument for ending war I've ever heard in my life...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Now, mind you I used to work for the defense industry, so I may be a bit biased...
I think war technology is a good thing. I would much prefer to simply not go to war, but that sentiment hasn't really held sway at any point in the last few thousand years or so. Somebody always wants to abuse somebody else, and when that ambition reaches the scale of having entire demographics in conflict, you get a war.
Like all large-scale endeavors, a war is messy. People often have their own goals for joining an organization. In a large corporation, their goals might be as sinister as "get paid to sleep", but in a war, they might find a convenient way to hide a murderous rampage under the guise of patriotic service. Of course, this is something everyone (else) would like to avoid, but it's hard to spot the difference between a psychopathic killer and a well-trained soldier.
In the rest of society, this is where a justice system comes into play. Knowing that evidence will be collected and that a crime is likely to be punished deters further crime. Attempts to hide a crime often just produce more evidence against the perpetrators. No, it's not a perfect system, and the justice system itself can be abused, but it's still a net benefit in a peaceful society.
In war, the rigid justice system is often placed second to completing a mission, and any allegations of wrongdoing will be accompanied by very sparse surviving evidence. Within a few days of a crime, witnesses are reassigned, memories are repressed, and new missions take priority over a bureaucratic boondoggle.
Technology doesn't have those limits. Events can be captured, and recordings can be archived. Decisions can be made far from the field of battle, in the safety of a conference room and with the pooled knowledge and awareness of the whole team, supported by streaming intelligence from remote surveillance. Those decisions and the resulting actions can be analyzed, dissected, replayed, and repeated endlessly as a training exercise, until every soldier behaves exactly as the commanders (right up the chain to the top) have authorized.
No, it's not going to be easy. Yes, there will be misbehavior and abuse. There will still be the rampaging marauders who use the military as a ride to a third-world country so they can indulge their own anarchist fantasy. Even if everyone acts appropriately, there will be edge cases that lead to mistakes in everyone's judgement. Nothing will be a perfect solution, but we can work to make it better.
We can put always-on cameras on each soldier. We can use AI to suggest different interpretations of intelligence reports. We can use high-precision guided weaponry to avoid collateral damage. We can use computerized information systems to present an accurate understanding of evidence, and most importantly, we can support a military culture where soldiers know they will be accountable for their actions, and can trust that they will be guided appropriately.
A military is a machine, and for as long as there have been soldiers, they have just been parts in that machine. With modern technology, we can improve the machine, to make it the most reliable, most accurate, and least error-prone.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Freedom is not an external influence. Right now your freedom is controlled by your government. They keep telling you they're fighting in other countries for it, but they're legislating away your rights at home.
M$ has nothing much left in consumer appeal so is going down the death machine route, taking up their role in the mass extinction of humanity.
Well I certainly rather they'd be doing that than trying to push Windows 10.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Trump is a Russian urolagnia addict: Totally true and makes sense.
Anti-military agitation from people who, if stereotypes are to be believed, were planning to vote for a woman who wanted to conduct wargames on the border of a Russian external territory, baiting war with a nuclear power: Totally organic and not beneficial to Russia at all.
If y'all worried about Russia so much perhaps you should think if your own actions benefit them?
"we're only making them scripted tech demos that we lie about the future potential of... it's not like we're actually helping them do anything useful except read science fiction stories and assume they're possible..."
50 people doesn't constitute an "outcry" at a company of 100,000+. 50 people barely constitutes and outcry at a company of 1000. If you don't want to work on a project that's going to be used by the military, don't work on a project that's going to be used by the military*.
* Alternatively, fill your bosses house with a giant tinfoil pan of popcorn.
US Military takes order from US Government & US Government is democratically elected by US Public!!!
Meaning any US Company that refuse to work for US Military, would be refusing to work for US Public!!!
& not to mention, all employees need to respect decisions by their corporate leadership, or, resign (unless they claim their company is doing anything illegal)!!!
I think we need more clam bakes.
Here is a better plan. Just take that list of trouble makers and fire them. Make an example of them for the next batch to come up. There are plenty of people out there that will do their job without letting some social justice bullshit get in the way.
The data will be massaged to support the political position the politicians want it to be. The new technology will be used to reduce our losses while causing as many if not more casualties to both the civilian and combatant populations in the region we are enforcing our will on.
If our military was strictly used in domestic defensive actions, or actions in defense of friendly nations requesting our aid, I would agree. But we are out there taking retalitory and punitive actions against foreign countries who are primarily regional threats that should be dealt with by regional powers, saving us lives, material expenses, and political capital for when we really need it.
Microsoft would be just another second rate player without the Pentagon.
That is how they avoided being branded as a monopoly.
Now, their future depends on the military.
They are hooked.
First consider the needed security clearances?
Workers for any part of any project for the US mil should not go full outcry.
The background investigations should have considered the politics of all staff who could have an need to outcry.
They never should have seen or been aware of any US mil project.
Better testing and background investigations should find the perfect staff able to work on complex mil and security sensitive tasks.
A democracy should be able to work with any company that has security clearances to work on a mil project.
No outcry.
Not expect to read about such mil work in the media in real time.
How to fox this?
Ensure a company is actually able to keep secrets. Test the staff with a totally fictional project that f they talk about is no loss first. See who talks to the media using fictional project terms.
Do full and actual background investigations.
Walk the backgrounds of staff. Their politics, education, skills, hobbies, banking, network use, reading. University politics, friends, social media use.
Friends of friends.
See who can be trusted to work on a mil project.
Then talk about the real project with staff.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Just rebrand some google glass.
Want "increased lethality"?
Enlist American police force members. Those crazy mofos will shoot anything.
If you feel the military is the evil, then act accordingly and remove yourself from the blanket of protection they provide! Or act like a responsible citizen in a democracy, vote. And BTW, just because your chosen candidate didn't win, it gives you no right to stop being a citizen. Citizens also have duties, not just rights.
Would have been for Microsoft to point out the myriad ways all sorts of Microsoft wares assist the military, and... point out that the outraged have worked on probably at least one of them.
It seems this removes the EWACS/STARS control structure, thus democratizing reconnaissance and surveillance. It does little to change boots on the ground or bombing of civilians.
Another alternative to creating such enhanced lethality is to not to create or use the products at all and use bigger bombs leading to more unnecessary casualties and more friendly fire incidents. We have iterated on this path for some time already.
How about the computer that runs your tractor? The integrated circuits that control the hydraulics? The touch screen that configures much of the tractor? The synthetic lubricants in the engine? The joystick that controls the accessories? How about duck tape, weather radar, synthetic rubber tires, etc.
Many of these technologies started in the military and then became general use items, thanks to military research and development.
--
In responding, a Microsoft spokesperson said, "Come on guys, who would run a battleship on Windows? Seriously? That thing would blue-screen at the first sign of a threat. It's obvious we are trying to cause peace here."
Richard Stallman couldn't be reached for comment, but was heard laughing in the back.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
If I were a soldier and got Microsoft's product to use in combat, I would kill myself... or die from laughter... or enemy bullets... either way I would be dead in battle. Thanks Microsoft.
why shouldn't he defend it?
OTOH, just because some random corp's CEO says something, it doesn't have to be true. Actually, come to think of it, its truth probability might well be far below .5
"We made a principled decision that we're not going to withhold technology from institutions that we have elected in democracies to protect the freedoms we enjoy"
Who the hell elected the military?
After all, most of those presentations describing operational maneuvers, including bombing, remote controlled UAV, etc. are done in PowerPoint.
I believe those who complained had it a little too cushy, as much as I'm not a military type, I think that having a strong military, or police force, is like having a strong immune system:
- It's necessary to have it ready at all time, to defend against unexpected threats
- Both could at time turn against their host
There may be ways to defend against the monstrous rise of the military industrial complex (it costs way too much), but refusing to partake in it in that manner doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
That Microsoft is a whore and is after that sweet sweet defense contractor money.
By all means let's kill as many people as we can. I need a better VR headset.
The rich pay 70% of _income_ taxes.
That figure doesn't include Social Security & Medicare (which cap at $134k/yr), sales tax, heath insurance (I need it to live, so it's a tax, anyone who says otherwise is a fool), various governmental fees, property taxes, sin taxes, etc, etc.
This is why I pay 52% of my income as some form of tax but see little or no benefit from the government, while the wealthy pay 1-3% of their incomes as taxes (after loopholes and offshore hideouts) and get the best civilization has to offer.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Electronic Arts and Dice made such a beautifull game but I have to get a good computer to play it. Guys, I found such a service where I can win gamer stuff by opening cases. Here it is https://drakemall.com/boxes/ga... I never faced with such services before so don`t believe in it. Maybe some of you know it? I`m afraid that it`s a fake.
"It's really about being a responsible corporate citizen in a democracy." The United States is a Constitutional Federal Republic (a federation of states with a Representative Democracy). Despite a strong democratic tradition, the U.S. is not a “Direct Democracy“