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

UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 219 posts

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#131

Post by rayiner »

pjc50 wrote: post #113
PaulRobinson wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this as somebody who has worked vendor side in UK public sector for a number of years. It's policy. It's official Whitehall policy. As a department you can't hire programmers at £100k/year, because that pushes them way, way higher than civil service bands allow. But you can pay a "Systems Integrator" - a consultancy like Cap Gemini, Deloitte, Fujitsu - £600/day for the same programmer in the same seat. So, £100…

> So, £100k/year = bad, £120k/year via an external consultancy = good. Ding ding ding. This is all driven by ideological mistrust of the public sector, as you've pointed out and people are even defending in the comments.

It’s not “ideological mistrust of the public sector.” It’s that government jobs aren’t subject to market forces so you need some sort of external controls, like pay scales.

FDR, who can hardly be accused of distrusting the public sector, emphasized the importance of public control over government sector salaries: https://www.fdrlibrary.org/unions

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#132

Post by zdragnar »

pjc50 wrote: post #113
PaulRobinson wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this as somebody who has worked vendor side in UK public sector for a number of years. It's policy. It's official Whitehall policy. As a department you can't hire programmers at £100k/year, because that pushes them way, way higher than civil service bands allow. But you can pay a "Systems Integrator" - a consultancy like Cap Gemini, Deloitte, Fujitsu - £600/day for the same programmer in the same seat. So, £100…

> So, £100k/year = bad, £120k/year via an external consultancy = good. Ding ding ding. This is all driven by ideological mistrust of the public sector, as you've pointed out and people are even defending in the comments.

> As a department you can't hire programmers at £100k/year, because that pushes them way, way higher than civil service bands allow

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#133

Post by rayiner »

skeletal88 wrote: post #98
PaulRobinson wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this as somebody who has worked vendor side in UK public sector for a number of years. It's policy. It's official Whitehall policy. As a department you can't hire programmers at £100k/year, because that pushes them way, way higher than civil service bands allow. But you can pay a "Systems Integrator" - a consultancy like Cap Gemini, Deloitte, Fujitsu - £600/day for the same programmer in the same seat. So, £100…

In Estonia this was solved by moving all the IT related people to organisations adjacent to the ministries and departments, so the lower paid civil servants wont have to be compared to the highly paid software developers and architects, etc. One colleague used to work as and architect of the justice ministry. He said the suit wearing civil servants with law degrees were pissed off at the homeless looking sweatshirt w…

This seems like a very practical solution lol.

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#134

Post by rayiner »

sillyfluke wrote: post #102
robertlagrant wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That part was referring to the air-quotes here: > but at least you won't have "inefficient civil service bloat" to have to manage.

Right, but you simply stated but haven't explained why bloat is inevitable in the government except to say there is no market pressure applied in government. Whereas the parent is literally talking about employing people using market rates, an example based on market pressure.

As soon as you raise the pay scales to allow programmers to get paid market rates, the people whose jobs don’t command that kind of money in the market will exploit the new pay scales. In the private sector, the underwater basket weaving majors hate how much more programmers make. In the government, they’ll have the power to actually equalize that pay at the taxpayer’s expense.

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#135

Post by throwthrowuknow »

mondrian wrote: post #82
bko wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it obvious? Because governments aren't good at management. There's no incentive or feedback loop. A company goes out of business if it's operationally a mess or doesn't deliver value. Not always but it's highly correlated. Governments face no pressure like this. Maybe mild pressure on the very local level. But when you get to the national level, orgs like the Pentagon misplace trillions of dollars with not so m…

The irony in your example is the modern Pentagon is largely a collection of private companies.

A collection of private companies contracted and administered by government.

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#136

Post by datsci_est_2015 »

rayiner wrote: post #131
pjc50 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, £100k/year = bad, £120k/year via an external consultancy = good. Ding ding ding. This is all driven by ideological mistrust of the public sector, as you've pointed out and people are even defending in the comments.

It’s not “ideological mistrust of the public sector.” It’s that government jobs aren’t subject to market forces so you need some sort of external controls, like pay scales. FDR, who can hardly be accused of distrusting the public sector, emphasized the importance of public control over government sector salaries: https://www.fdrlibrary.org/unions

Consultancies don’t appear to be subject to market forces either, judging by their complete dearth of talent and expertise.

In other words, “rent seeking”.

The only protection against pilfering of the public coffers appears to be strong cultural opposition to it, so exactly the opposite of what’s happening in the US, for example.

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#137

Post by jappgar »

pjc50 wrote: post #113
PaulRobinson wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this as somebody who has worked vendor side in UK public sector for a number of years. It's policy. It's official Whitehall policy. As a department you can't hire programmers at £100k/year, because that pushes them way, way higher than civil service bands allow. But you can pay a "Systems Integrator" - a consultancy like Cap Gemini, Deloitte, Fujitsu - £600/day for the same programmer in the same seat. So, £100…

> So, £100k/year = bad, £120k/year via an external consultancy = good. Ding ding ding. This is all driven by ideological mistrust of the public sector, as you've pointed out and people are even defending in the comments.

And this mistrust is deliberately sewn by right-wing politicians and media figures who are directly funded by government contractors.

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#138

Post by Hard_Space »

Sorry for the dumb question, but why is there an archive.today link for this? Is BBC news now paywalled in some regions or under some conditions? I'm guessing that the Beeb can handle the traffic, and that the site is not hugged to death.

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#139

Post by [deleted] »

benj111 wrote: post #29
Centigonal wrote: post #9

Palantir is very expensive. This is because: 1. they aim to deliver product company margins with a consulting-heavy model. 2. your software purchase funds a cadre of "free" FDEs and deployment strategists who customize your install, build a bunch of data pipes/transforms, and talk to people to figure out what all the data means. This could be a good deal if your tech org is not very competent at integrating your data…

I never understood why nation states pay outside companies for this stuff. You need the expertise to actually evaluate what you're getting anyway. Incentives are in no way aligned. At the state level you have the scale to do it in house.

[deleted]

Re: UK government replaces Palantir software with internally-built refugee system

#140

Post by roenxi »

pjc50 wrote: post #113
PaulRobinson wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this as somebody who has worked vendor side in UK public sector for a number of years. It's policy. It's official Whitehall policy. As a department you can't hire programmers at £100k/year, because that pushes them way, way higher than civil service bands allow. But you can pay a "Systems Integrator" - a consultancy like Cap Gemini, Deloitte, Fujitsu - £600/day for the same programmer in the same seat. So, £100…

> So, £100k/year = bad, £120k/year via an external consultancy = good. Ding ding ding. This is all driven by ideological mistrust of the public sector, as you've pointed out and people are even defending in the comments.

Just wandering in to this as a relative political bystander, but as I look at the polling out of the UK [0] I see that the party currently leading is some group called "REF" and I gather they did pretty well in the latest round of elections. I assume they're an old-established party who represent the deep contentment the British have with how the public service has been run.

I suppose they do seem a little unpopular, they aren't breaking 30% but they seem relatively popular compared to the more fringe groups like, say, LAB and CON. Have they, in what I assume is decades of stable political governance, made any mistakes that might have engendered this ideological distrust in how well the political system is managed?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_U...

Post reply on HN