Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Healthcare.gov technology stack (infographic)

thedoctorweighsin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–58 of 58 posts

Re: Healthcare.gov technology stack (infographic)

#51

Post by Iftheshoefits »

dm2 wrote: post #23
nathas wrote: post #2

$293M.... I'm just consistently angry over how much this cost. There are so many moving pieces, and while I understand that, $293M for one piece. Half a billion for a website. Christ.

Seriously, that number is staggering. CGI Federal literally ripped off the government, screwed the American people badly, and "stole" hundreds of millions. They should never be allowed to work on another project again and should be required to refund the government. The project managers should be fired and publicly humiliated. I STILL cannot even login to the website. The site has said "The system is down at the mome…

I think you misunderstand what goal government contractors, and the government officials that manage their contracts, are working toward. It's not a full-featured, working product. It's money. The contractors want more contract money. The government workers want visibility and job security. These things "work" in the contracting system by having contractors that play the same game the government workers play: which is needlessly and pointlessly extending contracts, mainly by fucking things up while fulfilling the technical letter of the contract.

Re: Healthcare.gov technology stack (infographic)

#52

Post by us0r »

nathas wrote: post #2

$293M.... I'm just consistently angry over how much this cost. There are so many moving pieces, and while I understand that, $293M for one piece. Half a billion for a website. Christ.

thats just the federal part. CA, HI, WA, KY, and many other states are hundreds of millions (billions) more.

Re: Healthcare.gov technology stack (infographic)

#54

Post by 31reasons »

pan69 wrote: post #45
31reasons wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you hire 10 web developers fulltime for 2 years, it would come down to ~$7000 hourly rate per developer.

10 web developers couldn't even remotely come close to building/implementing a system like this. This is not a web development project but an enterprise integration project. What you see as "the website" is just the tip of the ice berg. It's like saying that a car is just a steering wheel and four wheels because that's all you "see" but you don't know what's going on "under the hood". However, I do agree that the cos…

Seriously ? Give me specifics where exactly do you think $300 million go? Look at the slides its not for the complete system but the "front end" of it. Most of the software they use is Open Source, Cloud services/hardware is dirt cheap and Software Developer salaries are not that high.

Re: Healthcare.gov technology stack (infographic)

#55

Post by newsreader »

Iftheshoefits wrote: post #43
newsreader wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amen to that. This thread and all others that mention the healthcare.gov debacle would go on forever talking about MS and ignoring the fundamental issues of bad architecture and government waste.

It's not just government waste. The private, for-profit companies that are awarded these contracts are part of the problem. It's not like "government waste" is even the biggest problem here. The biggest problem is the private companies involved in this. Not the government. Although all parties deserve some blame, for sure, because they have a "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" approach.

I agree that all parties deserve some blame, but spreading the blame around does not excuse the amount of money the government spent on this and other projects such as recovery.gov. For profit private companies are in it to make money so I don’t blame them for taking the money; I blame them for bad design and architecture.

Re: Healthcare.gov technology stack (infographic)

#56

Post by Iftheshoefits »

newsreader wrote: post #55
Iftheshoefits wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just government waste. The private, for-profit companies that are awarded these contracts are part of the problem. It's not like "government waste" is even the biggest problem here. The biggest problem is the private companies involved in this. Not the government. Although all parties deserve some blame, for sure, because they have a "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" approach.

I agree that all parties deserve some blame, but spreading the blame around does not excuse the amount of money the government spent on this and other projects such as recovery.gov. For profit private companies are in it to make money so I don’t blame them for taking the money; I blame them for bad design and architecture.

You should blame them for taking the money, because they "take the money" specifically by acting in bad-faith in order to extend, extend, extend and extend the contract money flow into their coffers. That's how the system works: private, for-profit companies fuck things up, intentionally, and then because they are the experts on the system they fucked up they (practically) automatically get the (almost as lucrative) follow-on extension/"fix it" contracts. The "bad design and architecture" these for-profit companies come up with are a feature. It is intentional, and it is done intentionally because these for-profit companies aren't in the business of providing products and services for the government--they're in the business of needling more contract cash out of it.

Or, to put it another way, you can't cry foul at the government's waste of money when it is the contractors' bids and bad-faith implementation of the contracts pushing up the costs. In return for their efforts, their liaisons at the government get to keep their visibility on "important" projects high, and extend the life of their own jobs.

Re: Healthcare.gov technology stack (infographic)

#57

Post by newsreader »

Iftheshoefits wrote: post #56
newsreader wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that all parties deserve some blame, but spreading the blame around does not excuse the amount of money the government spent on this and other projects such as recovery.gov. For profit private companies are in it to make money so I don’t blame them for taking the money; I blame them for bad design and architecture.

You should blame them for taking the money, because they "take the money" specifically by acting in bad-faith in order to extend, extend, extend and extend the contract money flow into their coffers. That's how the system works: private, for-profit companies fuck things up, intentionally, and then because they are the experts on the system they fucked up they (practically) automatically get the (almost as lucrative)…

Ok I get it: The government and the politicians are not at fault here; it is the private for-profit companies fault. Sorry, but I just don’t agree with your point of view. Like I said: there’s plenty of blame to go around but I don’t see how anyone can justify spending that much money for something that doesn’t work.

Re: Healthcare.gov technology stack (infographic)

#58

Post by talmand »

icn2 wrote: post #18
talmand wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know what you mean, I could've totally made a failing website for $100 million max. I would have saved them money.

For government projects, sometimes they don't want to save money at all. They are more interested in how money can get in someone's pocket.

Fine then, my budget for the failing website is now $500 million. Savings be damned!

Oh crap, sorry, inflation. Price tag's now $750 million.

Post reply on HN