Hacker News Reader

Comment by Kukumber | Hacker News Reader

For this reason the US military said NO to Microsoft [1]

The more the deep state (nothing about conspiracy theory, it's just the people at the oval office, and their surroundings, mostly industry lobby) want to trust and push Microsoft, the worse it's going to get in the coming years were AI, software and hardware will be the deciding factor for the civilization war we are currently living

> Microsoft insiders worry the Pentagon may walk away from its $22 billion contract for mixed-reality goggles as the device continues to disappoint the military

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-military-hololens-...

View on HN

We need another less polarized word than deep state to describe the various industrial complexes entrenched in military & government, and the revolving door of employment between government -> lobbyists -> industry etc.

Or we need to stop banning words because people we don't like start using them (correctly, I might add.) It's annoying that once some people started saying that the country was run by a deep state populated by communist lizard child molesters, the reaction was to start insisting that there wasn't a deep state at all.

Maybe we can say military-industrial complex? Nice, venerable, well-established phrase, notably popularized by a president during his final words as a president.

> Or we need to stop banning words because people we don't like start using them (correctly, I might add.)

Who is banning words? At least in the US you have every right to say 'deep state' all you want but it probably doesn't mean in other people's minds what you might want anymore. I mean, it's the way of language evolution that when a phrase picks up a much different and negative connotation from what it had previously people stop using it.

I think "military–industrial complex" is the typical term.

It is, but despite it being coined by a former US President and WW2 Allied General, it is now taken to mean something akin to "defund the military".

Eisenhower wasn't exactly praising it when he coined the term, and the military and military-industrial-complex are different things. You can support one but not the other, although most people who use it in conversation tend to be against both, since it's implicitly pejorative.

Could you clarify? I'm having trouble understanding the equivalency because "Military industry complex" is a noun and "defund the military" is a verb (more-or-less)

I believe rchaud meant that the set of people using the term "military industrial complex" has a large overlap with the set of people demanding to "defund the military".

In what circles does it mean that? I’ve never heard that one.

Among politicians. Military spending is the one thing that never sees top-line cuts, even among so-called fiscal conservatives in Congress that are otherwise happy to slash "wasteful" federal funding for social programs.

You can lobby all you want to cut other types of government 'pork', and you'll probably have some champions in Congress on the same page. Only the military is untouchable. It's un-American to even consider cuts in that sector.

It has a bad rap because of the lobbying that defense companies do to ensure their profits are fed by the government. Oh and the wars.

I'd say they're equivalent to Big Pharma or Big Oil - all of which have captured any regulatory agency designed to control their misbehaviors.

For those unfamiliar with it, it was President Eisenhower's farewell speech:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower%27s_farewell_addres...

Military didn’t say no. Congress stepped in and demanded accountability. Military is still having wet dreams about IVAS (military version of hololens). Last I heard was an initial purchase for 1,000(?) units to continue testing. Also the military loves Office 365 and Teams. Everything is done through it now, of course nobody knows how to use collaboration tools and there is no training, so they still email PowerPoints all over the place.

I swear I saw a recent article saying they were moving forward.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/microsoft-us-army-combat-hololens...

Unfortunatley like many of the other comments have pointed out. This is incorrect. Most of the military currently uses Teams and O365. The military deal for hololens is going through and the shipments are greater thant he initial order. That information is dated.

Not so much:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-01/microsoft...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Sabotage

Looks like Microsoft will have to do in the matter of keeping the state from being too efficient.

Lol.. we all know Microsoft gets these contracts by rubbing shoulders with the right people and they have very little to do with whether the products are actually good.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com