←back to thread

The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

(steveblank.com)
285 points ridruejo | 3 comments | 11 Nov 25 14:34 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
stackskipton ◴[11 Nov 25 21:26 UTC] No.45893105[source]▶
As someone who has some familiarity with this process, just like safety regulations are written in blood, Federal Acquisition rules are written in misuse of money, sometimes criminally.

Yes, we have swung too much towards the bureaucrats but I'm not sure throwing out everything is solution to the issue.

Move fast works great when it's B2B software and failures means stock price does not go up. It's not so great when brand new jet acts up and results in crashes.

Oh yea, F-35 was built with move fast, they rolled models off the production line quickly, so Lockheed could get more money, but it looks like whole "We will fix busted models later" might have been more expensive. Time will tell.

replies(21): >>45893777 #>>45893843 #>>45893847 #>>45893934 #>>45894255 #>>45894410 #>>45894990 #>>45895591 #>>45895700 #>>45895838 #>>45896005 #>>45896219 #>>45896396 #>>45897182 #>>45897650 #>>45897842 #>>45899571 #>>45899715 #>>45899941 #>>45901076 #>>45902745 #
1. dfxm12 ◴[12 Nov 25 15:01 UTC] No.45901076[source]▶
Yes, we have swung too much towards the bureaucrats

Is this truly the case or are the criminals and other people who misuse money dragging people towards this position?

replies(1): >>45901790 #
2. stocksinsmocks ◴[12 Nov 25 16:01 UTC] No.45901790[source]▶
Were you under the impression that federal procurement was all above board before? I’ve got some bad news.

Your options are corrupt procurement or corrupt procurement with a 15% administrative surcharge of make-work patronage jobs for someone’s mistress or friends. I think that we’re in the “let’s pay our centurions in salt because the treasury is empty” stage of administrative innovations to allow the dead empire to linger. Personally, my hope is the next thousand year dark age we are stepping into comes with a knightly aesthetic.

replies(1): >>45903087 #
3. dfxm12 ◴[12 Nov 25 17:38 UTC] No.45903087[source]▶
Were you under the impression that federal procurement was all above board before?

No, the only impression I had was from the earlier post, which is light on details, which is why I was asking for clarification.

Your options are corrupt procurement or corrupt procurement with a 15% administrative surcharge of make-work patronage jobs for someone’s mistress or friends.

This is an obvious false dichotomy.