Microsoft workers demand it drop $480 million U.S. Army contract

ToxicBunny said:
Except they are selling it to the military for military use Cases... That makes it military hardware at that point...
Click to expand...
What the customer does with your product isn't always your responsibility.
Does the military have desktop PCs? Laptops? Mobile phones? Do they come with operating systems?
ZORMG MS / Apple / Dell / Intel / AMD / Motorola etc have been "selling military hardware for decades!"
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
What the customer does with your product isn't always your responsibility.
Does the military have desktop PCs? Laptops? Mobile phones? Do they come with operating systems?
ZORMG MS / Apple / Dell / Intel / AMD / Motorola etc have been "selling military hardware for decades!"
Click to expand...
I know it's complex for you to grasp.. But if you sell something directly to the military as part of a contract which will see the stuff being used for training and on the battlefield.. It becomes military hardware.
 
ToxicBunny said:
I know it's complex for you to grasp.. But if you sell something directly to the military as part of a contract which will see the stuff being used for training and on the battlefield.. It becomes military hardware.
Click to expand...
The one with the comprehension problem is you, you and the MS soy boys making a fuss. When you get a contract to sell consumer products to the US military, the entity with the biggest allocation of the biggest government budget in world history, you take it. End of story.

If they drum up support from all their gender studies professors to replace such a large contract with something bigger then great, if they don't have any solution to their perceived problem, then fek em. God knows they'll need augmented reality headsets to see the many genders they imagine exist.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
The one with the comprehension problem is you, you and the MS soy boys making a fuss. When you get a contract to sell consumer products to the US military, the entity with the biggest allocation of the biggest government budget in world history, you take it. End of story.

If they drum up support from all their gender studies professors to replace such a large contract with something bigger then great, if they don't have any solution to their perceived problem, then fek em. God knows they'll need augmented reality headsets to see the many genders they imagine exist.
Click to expand...
OK dude...
 
They should correct this:

The government has said the devices would be used on the battlefield and in training to improve soldiers “lethality, mobility and situational awareness.”
Click to expand...

to this

The government has said the devices would be used in safe spaces and in training to improve feminists and non binaries “rape whistle skills, victim role play and situational awareness of whiteness.”
Click to expand...
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
The one with the comprehension problem is you, you and the MS soy boys making a fuss. When you get a contract to sell consumer products to the US military, the entity with the biggest allocation of the biggest government budget in world history, you take it. End of story.
Click to expand...
Most companies aren't Microsoft. A $480 million contract would be a must for most other companies. Microsoft's worldwide revenue in 2018 was $110 Billion, the contract equals less than 0.5% of that - if any company has the power and financial health to turn down contracts that it feels might be murky it's Microsoft.

Not saying they should turn it down, am saying that they have the power and muscle to be able to refuse a contract of that size.
 
nightjar said:
My feeling too.
I always felt that a job was a privilege and not a right and if they can't fit in they can voetsak.
Click to expand...

A job a privilege? Fair work for fair pay, that's the deal.

You guys introduce concepts that have nothing to do with the basic nature of the contract. I have no right to a particular job, but it is in no way a privilege to have a particular job either.
Deliver and get paid for it. That's all there is to it.
If we're talking public service then yes, I can see privilege to serve. Otherwise you're confusing the nature of the arrangement.
.
 
Last edited:
Im sure if you PAN out on the crowd of employees apparently making all this noise you will notice about 9 employees of which only 4 is on the MS payroll.

To me it seems like free money for MS for little to no labor if the article is correct in what they would supply for $480million. That works out to $192000 per headset, whether MS need the money or not is really not the question. Seems to be a big win that would be turning away free money and that would be the dumbest corporate decision imaginable.

"Microsoft won a contract in November to supply the Army with at least 2,500 prototypes of augmented reality headsets, which digitally display contextual information in front of a user’s eyes."

I really enjoyed the follow part where they posted their petition on _TWITTER_ , lmao!!! Someone wake up these idiots.

"In the petition to Microsoft executives, posted on Twitter, the workers said they “did not sign up to develop weapons, and we demand a say in how our work is used.”
 
Last edited:
John Tempus said:
Im sure if you PAN out on the crowd of employees apparently making all this noise you will notice about 9 employees of which only 4 is on the MS payroll.
Click to expand...

Based on your what? Got a gut feel for crowd makeup?
.
 
eXisor said:
Based on your what? Got a gut feel for crowd makeup?
.
Click to expand...

Based on the fact they posted their petition on twitter. When there is not enough actual people to bond together at the company these idiots usually make a stink on twitter to get public interest to back them up.

Do you think it is normal if you have an internal issue to go onto Twitter and make your internal company issue known ? Thats mommyboy level stupid.

These same idiots can't realize that the same HoloLens will be available to the public later and if Microsoft don't take the contract the US could pick up the same hardware at consumer level pricing. Totally braindead issue.

Have a look at that twitter post comments, to me it seems exactly what I suspected, maybe 9 MS workers making a stink over this. The comments overwhelming laugh at them.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1099066343523930112

A group with a full 1000 followers, hahahaha.
 
Last edited:
John Tempus said:
Based on the fact they posted their petition on twitter. When there is not enough actual people to bond together at the company these idiots usually make a stink on twitter to get public interest to back them up.

Do you think it is normal if you have an internal issue to go onto Twitter and make your internal company issue known ? Thats mommyboy level stupid.
Click to expand...

Nothing in what you posted backs up your take on crowd makeup. You're just spewing stuff hoping it'll stick somewhere.

This section from the employees letter gives a good idea who these employees actually are.

"There are many engineers who contributed to HoloLens before this contract even existed, believing it would be used to help architects and engineers build buildings and cars, to help teach people how to perform surgery or play the piano, to push the boundaries of gaming, and to connect with the Mars Rover (RIP)."

"These engineers have now lost the ability to make decisions about what they work on, instead finding themselves implicated as war profiteers," they wrote.
.
 
Microsoft won the contract in November, as Bloomberg News first reported. It is intended to "increase lethality by enhancing the ability to detect, decide and engage before the enemy," according to a government description of the program. The devices would likely incorporate features not included in the civilian version.

In a document shared with companies that bid on the contract, the Army said it wanted the devices to include night vision and thermal sensing, as well as technology that could be used to monitor for concussions. It could eventually lead to the Army purchasing more than 100 000 headsets, which would exceed the total number of HoloLens headsets that have been sold to date.

Internal opposition has become a persistent issue for consumer technology companies looking to sell products for military and law enforcement use. Protests have broken out at large companies like Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Amazon.com Inc., and at smaller start-ups. A staff petition at Google last year pushed the company to retreat from a Pentagon contract that could have totalled up to $250m

more :-
https://www.fin24.com/Economy/World...-company-to-cancel-military-contract-20190224
 
eXisor said:
Nothing in what you posted backs up your take on crowd makeup. You're just spewing stuff hoping it'll stick somewhere.

This section from the employees letter gives a good idea who these employees actually are.

"There are many engineers who contributed to HoloLens before this contract even existed, believing it would be used to help architects and engineers build buildings and cars, to help teach people how to perform surgery or play the piano, to push the boundaries of gaming, and to connect with the Mars Rover (RIP)."

"These engineers have now lost the ability to make decisions about what they work on, instead finding themselves implicated as war profiteers," they wrote.
.
Click to expand...

Since you conveniently ignore the rest of what I typed, tell me how all their bitching make any sense in light of this.

"These same idiots can't realize that the same HoloLens will be available to the public later and if Microsoft don't take the contract the US could pick up the same hardware at consumer level pricing. Totally braindead issue."
 
John Tempus said:
Since you conveniently ignore the rest of what I typed, tell me how all their bitching make any sense in light of this.

"These same idiots can't realize that the same HoloLens will be available to the public later and if Microsoft don't take the contract the US could pick up the same hardware at consumer level pricing. Totally braindead issue."
Click to expand...

Do you really think a offhand twitter reference covers your crowd makeup comment? Lol. So move the goalposts, right?
You're assuming the versions will be identical when you simply don't know that until the two versions are released. But you're entitled to take Microsoft's word for it. Myself, I can see the employees point, would be pretty pissed myself it I'd been on that team, and want to see the final products; military and business, side by side, feature alongside feature.
Call me sceptical... Putting the same version out there to be reverse engineered by foreign military powers doesn't make sense.
.
 
Last edited:
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.
Click to expand...

Good for them.

Seriously if you work for a company and don't like what they are doing resign. You don't try force or threaten the company to work to your feels.

If you work for them and are a sharehold, you can try take it to shareholders meeting and bring it to vote, otherwise STFU or GTFO.
 
We used to manufacture a great deal of parts for Denel, also knew what they were going into and where they will go to war. Was a bit uneasy about it at the beginning but eventually you come to the realization that if you don't do it, someone else, also its going to kill terrorists so whats the problem?
 
Eniigma said:
Good for them.

Seriously if you work for a company and don't like what they are doing resign. You don't try force or threaten the company to work to your feels.

If you work for them and are a sharehold, you can try take it to shareholders meeting and bring it to vote, otherwise STFU or GTFO.
Click to expand...

100%...

And good for MS...
 
Eniigma said:
Good for them.
Seriously if you work for a company and don't like what they are doing resign. You don't try force or threaten the company to work to your feels.
Click to expand...
Why not? If you really like you job surely it makes more sense to pressure a company to act a certain way even if the chances of success are negligible, sure they could get fired for their efforts but isn't it better to fight for what you believe in rather than meekly resign?

Why is it conservatives are all about free speech but as soon as it comes to highlighting how companies with loads of money may earn said money you lot are all about "STFU or leave". Chances are this won't go anywhere and the people will either resign or stay and live with it but why are you so upset that this kind of thing got brought into the public eye?
 
Cray said:
Why not? If you really like you job surely it makes more sense to pressure a company to act a certain way even if the chance are negligible, sure they could get fired for their efforts but isn't it better to fight for what you believe in rather than meekly resign?
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with asking, but taking it to a public platform like Twitter would be a no no...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X