
Microsoft Wins $480M Army HoloLens Contract - twerkmonsta
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-28/microsoft-wins-480-million-army-battlefield-contract
======
herewulf
> "Many Microsoft employees don't believe that what we build should be used
> for waging war"

Someone is lacking in perspective. The modern US military cannot operate
without Windows, SharePoint, Exchange, Internet Explorer, Office, and most
importantly, PowerPoint. It's both frustrating and sad.

~~~
zimbatm
The modern world is also powered by technologies invented because of various
wars. Duct tape / super glue / rockets / radars which led to the microwave
over / ..

Wasn't the Internet initially a distributed communication network that would
still operate under nuclear attacks?

~~~
KineticLensman
> Wasn't the Internet initially a distributed communication network that would
> still operate under nuclear attacks?

Not really. The original ARPANET [0] didn't connect military command and
control systems but four different universities. However, the packet-switching
concept that underlies TCP/IP was informed by purely RAND theoretical studies,
conducted by Paul Baran [1], that looked at building resilient communications
systems.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Baran](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Baran)

~~~
Wohlf
While you are technically correct, ARPA and RAND both being military focused
research organizations, the parent comment is correct in spirit.

------
Traubenfuchs
For every employee that is upset about this there is probably another one that
is proud about it and 5 that really don't care.

~~~
jmspring
Count me in the "don't care" department -- the company needs to do business to
survive and thrive. I like that things are going well for the company at the
moment.

Some of these people complaining about it are likely the same sort that, when
given a chance to ask Satya a question during a Q&A session, ask about getting
free food in Redmond.

------
langitbiru
It reminds me of Black Mirror episode where using Augmented Reality, the face
of enemies is morphed into the face of monsters so the soldiers would not
hesitate to kill the enemies. May we live in interesting times!

~~~
afpx
It’s a pretty good idea. Post-battle investigations show that only like 15-30%
of soldiers actually shoot their weapons (the percentage increases along with
the distance). So, a commander could effectively double or triple their force
with a small change.

------
syntaxing
I used a hololens recently and I was super excited but was disappointed in the
end. The technology is definitely cool but the limited field of vision really
kills it. The built in hand gestures detection is nice though.

~~~
wangyjx
next version of Hololens will solve the view field issue. I think MS will
delivery next-gen hololens to Army

~~~
vtesucks
I didn't downvote but what makes you think?

~~~
wangyjx
microsoft mentioned earlier this year that it would release the new version in
19

------
martijn_himself
This seems to be a typical case of someone in charge of a budget having to
spend it otherwise it will be allocated elsewhere.

Either they have access to a completely improved device or expect a lot of
devices being chucked out by aggravated servicemen. The current gen HoloLens
is not much more than a toy.

~~~
fromthestart
>the Army said it wanted to incorporate night vision and thermal sensing,
measure vital signs like breathing and “readiness,” monitor for concussions
and offer hearing protection.

Maybe a little ambitious, but if it does half of those things it might be
quite useful, no?

~~~
starbeast
They should be very careful with the naming. Something tells me that 'Windows
For Helmets' may not inspire morale.

------
Simulacra
This is almost humorous in a sad kind of way. If Google is not able to fulfill
contracts for the Defense Department, then the government will simply go to
the next source. I think Amazon, with its new HQ2 a mile from the Pentagon,
and less problems of employees walking out, is going to dominate in this area.

------
mindgam3
Props to Microsoft biz dev for finding someone to buy those things, but wow -
that is a _lot_ of money to spend on HMDs that will never get anywhere near
actual combat. At least I hope they don’t, for the safety of our troops. Can
you even imagine wearing one of those monstrosities in a hostile environment
requiring agility and situational awareness?

------
lostgame
Not that I agree with, or support war in any way, and it always makes me a
little sick to my stomach to see brilliant people coming up with technology to
make killing people simpler - but...

HoloLens has sure better improve by orders of magnitude before I'd ever want
to see it used in any sort of field.

It's like looking into a postage stamp of reality.

------
artur_makly
if this leads us to mitigating future wars to just a virtual battlefield .. im
all for it.

let them get their testosterone kicks while the rest of us evolve peacefully.

------
lawrenceyan
Where is the outrage from Microsoft employees? Take a stand like your Google
counterparts have! You can make money and not have to sell away your soul at
the same time. They aren’t mutually exclusive.

Take self-driving vehicles. Every single piece of technology used in its
development could be used with some minor tweaking in a military application
to massively increase the lethality of existing weapons and allow for an
unprecedented level of increased killing and destruction. But instead of
selling themselves out to a future that will be remarkably more dystopian if
given in to military application, Google has chosen to make commercial self-
driving vehicles which not only will likely save an innumerable amount of
lives by preventing fatal driving accidents, but also will be making boatloads
of money at the same time!

Technology is a force multiplier for better or worse, and it’s up to us as the
future engineers and scientists who will be creating this technology to choose
the right path. For those sociopathic leaning people who could care less about
avoiding a future of death on an unprecedented massive and automated scale,
luckily that path will be no less lucrative.

~~~
mc32
There should be outrage from Russia, Syria, Iran, ISIS, etc., but not US
employees. This enhances _our_ army, rather than others' armies. We have some
indirect control over what our army does, but none over those other armies.

Sometimes idealists become like pacifists who would rather die than confront
someone who is going to annihilate you. That your PoV, but it certainly isn't
the majority PoV even amongst Democrats.

The world isn't a dreamy place; you have to make dirty choices, given what's
available.

Of course, if you want to see western influence wane, then sure, and allow
other less progressive influence wax. That's the realpolitik.

These decisions should be left to the democratic process rather then the
province of unelected idealists.

~~~
r00fus
Your viewpoint makes sense if you see the US Armed Forces as a incorruptible
benevolent force.

Take a look at police forces who claim to "serve and protect" while summarily
executing random citizens (sorry, wrong house SWATTING) or racially motivated
(black kid with toy = imminent threat).

~~~
pavelrub
Not at all. His viewpoint makes sense simply by understanding that US military
superiority over countries like Russia and China is significantly better, to
the entire western world, than any realistic alternative.

~~~
asendra
That only makes sense if you stop putting morons in charge, though.

