←back to thread

186 points drak0n1c | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
FL33TW00D ◴[] No.38483947[source]
Where is the UK/EU equivalent of Anduril? Seems this "neo-defense" revolution is a US only phenomenon.
replies(3): >>38483984 #>>38484402 #>>38484837 #
contrarian1234 ◴[] No.38483984[source]
I've never heard of a defense sector startup in Europe

In the US its quite common. A huge percentage of defense spending is specifically restricted to small businesses and big projects have percentages that must be subcontracted to small subcontractors. And then there is the whole SBIR program too. So anything R&D-ish goes there. It's a giant subsidy program for white christian enginners (bc you need clearance)

I say subsidy bc they have a near zero chance of actually supplying the military. You're extremely lucky to ever get a Phase II. The big players ensure none of the small businesses actually ever get big

replies(2): >>38484105 #>>38484176 #
defrost ◴[] No.38484176[source]
Anecdotally it's Mormons that are supposedly over represented in the TLA's:

    in reality, Mormons end up in these agencies for perfectly logical reasons. The disproportionate number of Mormons is usually chalked up to three factors: Mormon people often have strong foreign language skills, from missions overseas; a relatively easy time getting security clearances, given their abstention from drugs and alcohol; and a willingness to serve.
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/why-mormons-make-great...

https://www.quora.com/Are-Mormons-over-represented-in-the-CI...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35772466

https://www.deseret.com/2022/11/1/23403019/fact-or-fiction-t...

In hard numbers it's difficult to verify, besides being closely guarded intelligence agencies they're Federal and don't publish breakdowns of employment by religion, etc.

Military R&D tends to be broader minded in the sense they need hard skillsets and will take anyone with citizenship, a verifiable background, and the technical chops .. and even go wider if pressed for bodies.

replies(1): >>38484254 #
1. ◴[] No.38484254[source]