
The Pentagon Is Building a Team of Tech-Savvy Soldiers - ohjeez
https://www.wired.com/story/pentagon-dream-team-tech-savvy-soldiers/
======
withdavidli
Never understood the underpaying of highly qualified people in the govt.
Making a sacrifice for your country in a high powered / representative
position is one thing, but the rank and file? Billions are spent on defense
contracts and old software, but when bringing on teams of people to revamp the
system, they want these people to take more than a 50% pay cut. D.C. is an
expensive place to live as well. If you think something is crucial for the
country to advance and survive, don't be cheap about it.

~~~
wmeredith
Eh, look at it as a filter for true believers. Mercenaries are dangerous,
because they have a price.

~~~
gbhn
Perhaps a better analogy: let's say you're hiring people with the offer that
you'll pay them $2M the first year, then nothing for 20 years. The danger is
that the person will quit. So it is more conservative to offer a deal where
you pay them nothing for 20 years, then $2M. Then you're pretty sure they'll
stay, especially if they're 15 years in.

I think that's probably the best way to understand the salary/pension trade-
off. The public sector is geared to be quite risk averse in investments, so it
offers back-weighted comp to try to be frugal on training and provide
continuity.

There's also basically no other employer that can credibly offer this kind of
comp, so the public sector, by offering it, can compete quite well for talent
in the space of those interested in that configuration. It's not the only way
to run things, but it makes some sense.

~~~
Merad
Do civilian government employees even get a pension plan anymore? I got an
offer a few years back from a three letter agency in DC and I'm pretty sure
they just had a 401k.

~~~
yardie
I believe so. Federal employees don’t pay social security so their only fixed
income will come from their government pension.

~~~
martzcodes
Yes they do. In the old system they didn't, but everyone since ~1984 does (and
most of the old-system folks are retired or near retirement now.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-
eye/post/federa...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-
eye/post/federal-retirement-contributions-questions-and-
answers/2012/02/23/gIQArFxsVR_blog.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ab44e19f1dda)

~~~
yardie
Right I was talking to a retired, lifelong federal employee who mentioned he
didn’t pay SS. Since ‘84 was over 30 years ago I expect the number to flip for
those on the new pension scheme, soon.

------
throwaway129386
As someone who works for the Defense Department I found this article totally
unsurprising. This sort of story is common. The question people should be
asking is why does it take a 3-star general's blessing in order to get a team
functioning computers that are usable for something besides Email and
Microsoft Office.

Another major obstacle that isn't touched on in this article is buying things.
Typical timeline for purchasing anything through the normal mechanisms is
minimum 4 months and 6-9 months isn't uncommon many years. Doesn't really
matter how much it costs. So any group that wants to get things done on a
reasonable timeline ends up putting a substantial portion of their budget on a
contract who's sole purpose is to be a purchasing vehicle that circumvents the
usual buying process.

~~~
j9461701
I think this article does a wonderful job explaining why the military is built
the way it is:

[https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/08/08/the-command-and-
co...](https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/08/08/the-command-and-control-
management-method/)

 _If Command and Control is such a bad way to run a team, why does the
military use it?_

 _This was explained to me in NCO school. I was in the Israeli paratroopers in
1986. Probably the worst paratrooper they ever had, now that I think back._

 _There are several standing orders for soldiers. Number one: if you are in a
mine field, freeze. Makes sense, right? It was drilled into you repeatedly
during basic training. Every once in a while the instructor would shout out
“Mine!” and everybody had to freeze just so you would get in the habit._

 _Standing order number two: when attacked, run towards your attackers while
shooting. The shooting makes them take cover so they can’t fire at you.
Running towards them causes you to get closer to them, which makes it easier
to aim at them, which makes it easier to kill them. This standing order makes
a lot of sense, too._

 _OK, now for the Interview Question. What do you do if you’re in a minefield,
and people start shooting at you?_

 _This is not such a hypothetical situation; it’s a really annoying way to get
caught in an ambush._

 _The correct answer, it turns out, is that you ignore the minefield, and run
towards the attackers while shooting._

 _The rationale behind this is that if you freeze, they’ll pick you off one at
a time until you’re all dead, but if you charge, only some of you will die by
running over mines, so for the greater good, that’s what you have to do._

 _The trouble is that no rational soldier would charge under such
circumstances. Each individual soldier has an enormous incentive to cheat:
freeze in place and let the other, more macho soldiers do the charging. It’s
sort of like a Prisoners’ Dilemma._

 _In life or death situations, the military needs to make sure that they can
shout orders and soldiers will obey them even if the orders are suicidal. That
means soldiers need to be programmed to be obedient in a way which is not
really all that important for, say, a software company._

You need a 3 star general's blessing to get computers because the whole
military is built around authoritarianism and slavish obedience. It is built
on those things because, in war, they are necessary. This has an unfortunate
knock-on effect of making every decision take way too long and severely limits
the autonomy of everyone in the chain of command, in often ridiculous ways.
But if it comes down to being better at developing new tech, and winning a
war, the army clearly has priority on the later rather than the former.

~~~
chrisseaton
> the whole military is built around authoritarianism and slavish obedience

This is a huge misconception people have about the military. In fact the core
philosophy of command in western militaries is one of enabling people to make
their own independent decisions. The military wants nothing less than non-
thinking obedient slaves because they know that’s how wars are lost.

~~~
j9461701
>This is a huge misconception people have about the military.

I just gave you a first hand account of it, and a concrete illustration of it
is the current topic of discussion. It's difficult to call what is being
clearly demonstrated through multiple channels "a huge misconception".
Especially considering this is an Israeli NCO saying this, when the Israelis
have a reputation for actually being one of the _most_ individualistic armies
in the West.

>In fact the core philosophy of command in western militaries is one of
enabling people to make their own independent decisions.

Compared to the earlier forms of warfare, this is absolutely true. A modern
NCO has a level of independent from central command that would have utterly
flabbergasted officers even a hundred years ago. Heck, Roman centurions were
afforded less autonomy to make decisions than we give modernly to srgts.

But in absolute terms, compared to the civilian sector? The military is still
an extremely authoritarian place that is utterly slavish to obedience. Because
it has to be, men still need to obey their superiors when told to do things
they might not want to do. Yes lower and lower ranks are given the freedom to
set their own objectives and adapt on the fly to changing circumstances, and
compared to the rest of military history that is quite something, but they
still are not remotely individualistic or all that autonomous compared to non-
military contexts.

I mean why do you suppose we retain the officer/enlisted divide, and still
demand both sides keep a cordial but distant relationship? It's because we
still need the authoritarian stuff as a backbone, so when an officer says
"Jump" an enlisted man jumps rather than trying to argue. The Soviets found
this out the hard way after the 1917 revolution, when they tried abolishing
the officer corps. as a vestige of elitist authoritarianism and it backfired
so horrifically they had to gobble up defecting white army officers just to
survive.

~~~
chrisseaton
> I just gave you a first hand account of it

From someone who describes themselves as being very bad at the job! Maybe this
was what he was getting wrong?

> when an officer says "Jump" an enlisted man jumps rather than trying to
> argue

This is what people get wrong. When an officer says 'jump' the enlisted man
actually responds 'tell me what you want me to achieve, sir, then it's my job
to decide how I want to make it happen whether that's jumping or something
else'.

A junior non-commissioned officer will tell you respectfully but firmly to
back well off if you start telling them how to complete a task.

~~~
j9461701
>From someone who describes themselves as being very bad at the job! Maybe
this was what he was getting wrong?

Perhaps. He was really awful at the whole "military discipline" part of being
in the military. Now he's a software developer, so that all worked out for
him.

>This is what people get wrong. When an officer says 'jump' the enlisted man
actually responds 'tell me what you want me to achieve, sir, then it's my job
to decide how I want to make it happen whether that's jumping or something
else'.

I personally only have 2nd hand accounts of the interaction from the officer's
side, so I may well be getting it wrong.

My physics classes had a few navy guys in them, who were trying to
get...something or other, they needed a degree in a hard science to get a
promotion. I don't really know what exactly. Anyway, being really interested
in ships I talked their ear off about everything whenever they'd let me. And
the topic of ordering men around was always treated with a
certain...presumption that every word they said would be instantly obeyed
without question. Stand here and look over there at the horizon until I say
otherwise sailor. Scrape this wall with this scrapper sailor, and then paint
it over. Carry this crate below decks, no stopping sailor. Inventory the
armory sailor, mop the deck sailor, etc. etc.

------
jimmyswimmy
So I have a hard time believing the 100k price tag. They are not including
everything here, which is typical. The government usually doesn't consider
overhead costs because to the agency they are fixed. That's a multiple of 2-3.
They're certainly depending on some existing developed technology which
doesn't sound COTS to me, and I have no idea how much to value that at. Maybe
another 100-500k unless it comes from a major prime in which case... 1M or
more.

The biggest thing increasing development costs for these kinds of projects is
the fact that it is SO hard for development teams to get real understanding
and feedback from the actual guys using the equipment. It takes a near act of
God in many cases to get as close as they did in this story. That's what gives
you an actual usable product at the end of the R&D effort and what saves the
most money.

Also I'd work for this team in a heartbeat. Sounds like fun even if I don't
believe all their numbers.

~~~
joejerryronnie
The $100K is probably just the cost of materials.

------
zachruss92
I really enjoyed this article. The DDS is literally doing the same kind of
things that the USDS is doing, but for military applications. Given the fact
that the largest portion of our taxes goes towards defense spending,
initiatives like create opportunities to allocate resources more efficiently,
iterate with agility, and save a ton of money.

When you look at DoD contractors, there is obviously a motivation on their end
to have larger contracts with inflated budgets and prolonged timelines -
they're businesses. On the flip side, a government agency has none of those
motivations - they just want to save lives as quickly and affordably as
possible.

I am curious to see if these "lean" organizations will pop up in other parts
of the federal/state/local governments. There are so many areas where better
UX, logical efficiency, or inner-department communication could make people's
lives easier or even save them:

\- In PA you need to sign up for a tax ID separately from filing articles of
incorporation. Why can't the Department of State and Department of revenue's
system sync up to create a tax ID at the time of incorporation?

\- Philadelphia's transit authority SEPTA has been rolling out a cashless fare
system using RFID/NFC. It was supposed to be released in 2013 and still isn't
complete. It cost $300 Million for Xerox to build which was twice as much as
the initial budget. The kicker is their website used isn't even functional on
mobile - it _literally_ uses nested tables for layout. A more efficient way to
do this would be to use your phone for everything (using built in NFC) and an
app to manage your fares.

~~~
arkis22
The largest portion of our taxes does not go to defense spending. It goes to
entitlements.

~~~
wmeredith
Absolutely. 62% of the budget goes to social security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
The rest is discretionary spending and a bit more than half of _that_ goes to
“defense”.

Source: [https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-federal-budget-
breakdown-3305...](https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-federal-budget-
breakdown-3305789)

~~~
adventured
That's just the federal budget. US taxes & spending include local + state +
federal.

Leaving off the other $3.x trillion in taxation & spending, nearly an entire
other federal government, paints a very incomplete picture.

The military is 10% of all government spending in the US. Total government
spending is around $7.2 trillion for 2018.

------
bb101
Love the lead picture -- because, you know, you're obviously not in tech if
you're not wearing a t-shirt, hoodie and jeans ensemble in an environment
where they would otherwise be out of place.

------
Spooky23
Great story that should trigger some thought in valley tech people.

There are smart people all over the place who are difficult to reach.

------
grivescorbett
3 orders of magnitude difference in cost... I think we’re having the wrong
conversations about taxes in the US.

------
vonseel
How to apply?

~~~
TheJoYo
they require a clearance which can take 6 months to a year to complete. most
the work is in DC area so being nearby helps.

------
BurnGpuBurn
Nice advertisement for the Pentagon, I bet they're looking left and right for
people with the right qualifications.

------
black6
> “The Army didn’t really know what to do with me,” he says. “So they sent me
> to Ranger School. I learned how to jump out of planes and carry rifles and
> stuff like that.”

 _GROAN_ What branch did you go, fuckwit? That's what the Army wanted to do
with you.

~~~
dang
Please don't do this here.

