Which Cloud Company Should Get The JEDI Contract?



  • May be an interesting discussion...

    https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/29/what-each-cloud-company-could-bring-to-the-pentagons-10-b-jedi-cloud-contract/

    As the title states, which should get it? Which one, or should it be split among 2 or more? Why?

    1B a year to one place to maximize infrastructure, or half that to 2 companies to split the load? Could 1 company do better with 1B a year handling the full load?



  • It'll be some crappy company who is totally incompetent like SAIC, now called Leidos, or isn't in the tech business in any real way but somehow, probably through knowing people on the committee(s) in charge manages to get the contract. Yes it starts with a choice of good companies, but soon enough they'll leave after having to deal with technically incompetent committee members who don't understand what a scope is and the only ones left will be companies absolutely incapable of doing the job.

    I saw this happen first hand, in the state of Kansas they were redoing their DMV system, I made two predictions when this happened:

    1. It would be delayed
    2. When it finally launched it would be broken as hell and they'd have tons of problems with it.

    Of course as is easy to predict, I was right. The reason? The company in charge of writing the DMV software and handling their computers was 3M, yes 3M, the company that makes paper stuff.

    That's how government contracts work, I expect nothing less than an underdelivered, overpriced, crappy security nightmare done as half-assed as possible. And this is just something that happens when people who don't know what they're doing are in charge of deciding how things should work, so this isn't just a government problem, it happens at large companies all the time too, we just hear more about it from government.

    They don't hire the best company for the job, and that's just obvious from history, nor do they hire the company with the lowest bid, they hire the company that somehow impresses committees always run by people who know literally nothing about technology, networks, or security.

    So to answer your question: nobody you expect and nobody worthy of the contract.

    That's if any civilians have a say. Being that it's the Pentagon, something else may happen, but there may be too much government/Congressional/civilian leadership involvement. Sure the military may be vastly more bureaucratic but project for project, they tend to do a lot better than the civilian government does, at least in regard to properly picking someone who vaguely understands the project and also getting it done, even if it costs 10x more than it should. If I had to pick between democracy and stratocracy with a project like this, give me military any day, but hide my wallet.

    But flipping a coin with either, I'd still take the side of incompetence and failure.



  • Out of the big Corp names I'd have to guess Oracle. Unless they go with someone who has no expertise (being generous to Oracle here) and choose someone else like @tonyshowoff said.



  • @tonyshowoff said in Which Cloud Company Should Get The JEDI Contract?:

    It'll be some crappy company who is totally incompetent like SAIC, now called Leidos, or isn't in the tech business in any real way but somehow, probably through knowing people on the committee(s) in charge manages to get the contract. Yes it starts with a choice of good companies, but soon enough they'll leave after having to deal with technically incompetent committee members who don't understand what a scope is and the only ones left will be companies absolutely incapable of doing the job.

    I saw this happen first hand, in the state of Kansas they were redoing their DMV system, I made two predictions when this happened:

    1. It would be delayed
    2. When it finally launched it would be broken as hell and they'd have tons of problems with it.

    Of course as is easy to predict, I was right. The reason? The company in charge of writing the DMV software and handling their computers was 3M, yes 3M, the company that makes paper stuff.

    That's how government contracts work, I expect nothing less than an underdelivered, overpriced, crappy security nightmare done as half-assed as possible. And this is just something that happens when people who don't know what they're doing are in charge of deciding how things should work, so this isn't just a government problem, it happens at large companies all the time too, we just hear more about it from government.

    They don't hire the best company for the job, and that's just obvious from history, nor do they hire the company with the lowest bid, they hire the company that somehow impresses committees always run by people who know literally nothing about technology, networks, or security.

    So to answer your question: nobody you expect and nobody worthy of the contract.

    That's if any civilians have a say. Being that it's the Pentagon, something else may happen, but there may be too much government/Congressional/civilian leadership involvement. Sure the military may be vastly more bureaucratic but project for project, they tend to do a lot better than the civilian government does, at least in regard to properly picking someone who vaguely understands the project and also getting it done, even if it costs 10x more than it should. If I had to pick between democracy and stratocracy with a project like this, give me military any day, but hide my wallet.

    But flipping a coin with either, I'd still take the side of incompetence and failure.

    0_1538407986847_9d6234cf-1b97-48ff-99d4-85982d8ff751-image.png



  • If the Cloud JEDI contract isn't called Bespin, I'm outa here.



  • @tonyshowoff said in Which Cloud Company Should Get The JEDI Contract?:

    Yes it starts with a choice of good companies, but soon enough they'll leave after having to deal with technically incompetent committee members who don't understand what a scope is and the only ones left will be companies absolutely incapable of doing the job.

    I can't upvote this enough. This is supposed to pay $10b. I will bet dollars to donuts that whoever gets the contract will A) lose money and B) have about 10 deadline extensions.

    And after all that, it will be slapped together and almost unusable because of the red tape and ever moving goal posts of the scope of work.


Log in to reply