5 ms·
In regards to proximity, I felt the prior commenter was saying that aws had not made a physical investment inside a military state.. meaning the pentagon priori
by mattrp 7y ago
In regards to proximity, I felt the prior commenter was saying that aws had not made a physical investment inside a military state.. meaning the pentagon prioritized bidders that aligned with existing pork/spending priorities. I don’t know if that’s true but it’s an intriguing assertion.
- Frost1x 7y agoI mean Amazon's HQ2 is pretty darn close to the pentagon itself, less than a mile away.
- mattrp 7y agoThe pentagon is table stakes - everyone has something there. If you’re trying to demonstrate commitment, you invest in the hinterlands... and if you’re trying to justify a decision that otherwise is a deadlock that’s maybe where you find the tie-breakers.
- pm90 7y agoI’m not sure why you’re being downvoted as the point you’re bringing up is a legitimate one. If the assessment of 2 vendors finds them equal in most regards wrt the requirements, that’s when you look at somewhat unrelated factors to make the call. In this case, it’s entirely plausible that the DoD considered the fact that MSFT would be pliable to their concerns as a deciding factor.
- mattrp 7y agoexactly. Thank you sir! It’s a rough night out here in hacker land.
- afarrell 7y agoSoooo... Iowa?