Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday February 16 2020, @07:01PM   Printer-friendly
from the a-new-hope dept.

Amazon wins court injunction on controversial JEDI contract:

[...] Amazon late last year filed suit against the Trump administration over the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI) cloud-computing contract. Amazon last month asked the court to grant a temporary injunction halting any JEDI work while the case is pending, and today Judge Patricia Campbell-Smith agreed. Although the existence of the injunction is public, documents relating to the matter are presently sealed.

The JEDI contract is a $10 billion agreement to build a cloud computing and storage platform for use by the entire Department of Defense. Several firms were in the running for the deal, including Oracle and IBM. in April, the DoD dropped the list of finalist candidates to two: Amazon's AWS and Microsoft's Azure. AWS was widely expected to seal the deal, and so industry-watchers were surprised when in October Microsoft nabbed the contract instead.

Amazon filed suit a month later. The company argued that it didn't just lose the contract for ordinary reasons of cost or capability but was instead sabotaged for political reasons. Microsoft's win flowed from "improper pressure from President Donald J. Trump, who launched repeated public and behind-the-scenes attacks to steer the JEDI Contract away from AWS to harm his perceived political enemy—Jeffrey P. Bezos," the lawsuit argued. (Bezos is the founder of Amazon and CEO as well as owner of The Washington Post.)

Previously:


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday February 17 2020, @12:53AM

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Monday February 17 2020, @12:53AM (#958954) Homepage
    I'm mostly with you but I disagree with the absoluteness of the claim that the financial sector has everyone by the nads. They only have people and companies (which are not people, fuxake, how did that stupidity ever creep into being?) who are in debt fully by the balls. Those who are cash rich and/or highly liquid are immune from most of the pressure the banks can apply. However, they know that, which is why they've systematically encouraged (a) people/companies to get into private debt; and (b) governments to adopt fiscal and monetary policies (and even international relations/trade policies) that encourage people and companies to get into private debt. Then they have more power.

    It seems like there's 10 times more debt out there than there is actual stuff out there to own, they've done a *really* good job.

    Props to the Bard, the banks know husbandry indeed has its edge dulled - like junkies, you've got to be kept needy.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2