Live data from Hacker News

We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

digitaltrends.com

21–30 of 239 posts

Re: We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

#22
Good thing we are giving the federal government control over the healthcare system ( and positioning them to take even more control as we move towards single payer ). I am sure they won't screw it up like they have the the roll out of this small portion of the system.

Also I am really looking forwards to the day I can't get my kid seen by a doctor because there was a budget fight and the government shut down.

Re: We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

#24
post #22

Good thing we are giving the federal government control over the healthcare system ( and positioning them to take even more control as we move towards single payer ). I am sure they won't screw it up like they have the the roll out of this small portion of the system. Also I am really looking forwards to the day I can't get my kid seen by a doctor because there was a budget fight and the government shut down.

[deleted]

Re: We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

#25
post #2

If it really did cost over half a billion dollars for only 50k parallel connections, that is outrageous. It is hard to read/understand that spending breakdown, not sure what each 20-50 million dollar allotment is exactly for: http://usaspending.gov/explore?tab=By+Prime+Awardee&fiscal_y... Given how we can see the problem with this as developers, imagine what we don't understand about the 10 to 1 or even 100 to 1 over…

It is truly an awful scenario. As I stated recently in a comment on this subject, Federal contracting is a Rent Seeking scenario: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_seeking

I have a weird role: I work at a company which does tons of Federal contracts, but also has lots of private sector work. I keep my sanity by doing short term consulting with private clients. There are some sharp people working the Federal side, but it really is awful.

Winning a contract is EVERYTHING. It is a writing contest, and you can be sure that the Federal contract officer knows jack shit about the actual fundamentals of the project. The Contract Officer is a paper pusher whose job is to look at the line items in the Request for Proposal, and examine which company's proposal best "hits" each line item. And of course they will select a low bidder, which often is a bid too low for the company to even profit, simply meant to get their foot in the door.

The staffing of these Federal contracts is horrific. You get entire teams of "change management" people. I'm currently assisting on a personnel system for a major military organization. I recently had to witness an entire discussion by the change management team on removing hyphens from a particular term to help the branding. I almost threw up in my mouth.

The people I work with on the Fed contracts, in general, don't touch technology when they leave work. Therefore the only browser they use is IE8 (according to the customer org, it is more secure......) they do nothing outside of J2EE/.NET (usually just one of the two) and they HAVE/WILL never build a website that supports more than 5,000 enterprise users (concurrently).

It is incredibly easy to look like a wizard amongst this bunch, but the experience of the Federal world has made me avoid these projects like the plague. The incentives at the business level (and therefore the high salary jobs) are ALL for winning contracts. Performing well on the work won is just viewed as another cost center.

Re: We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

#26
post #22

Good thing we are giving the federal government control over the healthcare system ( and positioning them to take even more control as we move towards single payer ). I am sure they won't screw it up like they have the the roll out of this small portion of the system. Also I am really looking forwards to the day I can't get my kid seen by a doctor because there was a budget fight and the government shut down.

[deleted]

Re: We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

#27

I'll never understand how it's possible that government web sites cost so much, yet usually look like shit, work like shit and are easy to hack (at least in my country). I always get the feeling that companies that win the contracts are somehow related to people responsible for the decision, it's like "Hey, it's not our money, so let's milk the budget as much as possible!".

In Portugal, I know of about 5 systems that were developed by either companies of family members of politicians or by companies were one of the shareholders/owners were the decider on which company to use. The INEM (emergency response unit) hardware and software was sold by to INEM by the company the person deciding on which company to use created and then left INEM. Sorta went like

Public Contest -> Manager creates company and submits project -> Manager chooses own company -> Manager quits INEM to 'work' at the new company. This is public knowledge but there isn't much we can do about it

Re: We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

#28
post #22

Good thing we are giving the federal government control over the healthcare system ( and positioning them to take even more control as we move towards single payer ). I am sure they won't screw it up like they have the the roll out of this small portion of the system. Also I am really looking forwards to the day I can't get my kid seen by a doctor because there was a budget fight and the government shut down.

Think how stupid both sides will look if actual deaths can be attributed to their political posturing over fiscal matters. E.g. "Little Jimmy died because he couldn't get essential treatment. How can you try to make that ok by saying that you were both playing chicken, but the 'other guy' should have backed down?"

Re: We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

#29
Political organizations exist for political reasons.

So if you get elected to "do something" about orphans, you'll create an organization to do something. The goal of this organization is political: appear to be making progress on the orphan problem. At the very least, do not appear in the news as an example of government waste.

The current website problem is a political failure -- it looks bad. But that's just a short term consideration. The long-term bet is that over the next decades, the ACA will bring great political benefit to the political party that supported it, no matter what other things it does.

So when we evaluate projects created by political organizations for political reasons, the success criteria is much different than commercial or non-profit projects. I don't think this is a failure. Maybe a bump in the road, but it's nothing that won't work itself out over the next year or so. (And be long forgotten)

Remember, a lot of government contractors made money building these sites. A lot of people had jobs. A lot of committees and functionaries are able to add this to their list of good they've done in the world. Not being able to actually use the site for a while is a small pittance compared to the real, measured benefit the sites have created. So far. If it drags on for a long time, the political math could switch around the other way, but I doubt it.

Re: We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

#30
post #22

Good thing we are giving the federal government control over the healthcare system ( and positioning them to take even more control as we move towards single payer ). I am sure they won't screw it up like they have the the roll out of this small portion of the system. Also I am really looking forwards to the day I can't get my kid seen by a doctor because there was a budget fight and the government shut down.

>> "Also I am really looking forwards to the day I can't get my kid seen by a doctor because there was a budget fight and the government shut down."

Do you not think that doctors would be one of the essential personal not effected by a shutdown?

And do you seriously believe the US would completely ban private medical care? We have the NHS (free health care for everyone) but we also still have privatised care which you can choose to pay for if you want. It's 2013 and the US still doesn't provide free health care for its citizens. Pigs will fly before they not only do that, but ban private care.

Post reply on HN