Live data from Hacker News

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

digitaltrends.com

231–239 of 239 posts

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

#231
post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

insurance doesn't work unless it's universal. it just falls apart once either side picks and chooses. the young people don't buy it, and then they fall off their bike and they're screwed. and the insurers can't get stuck with just sick people, they have the whole pre-existing condition thing, so your kids get sick and you can't leave your job. a sick person looking for treatment is the opposite of everything that mak…

That's more than a bit of a strawman you've constructed. I for one am willing to admit that I'm not smart enough to construct a path to a "free market" (a phrase I've never used in this discussion till this message) system after three quarters of a century of massive government intervention. Heck, it would require an end to "democracy", and/or a few generations of radically changed public schooling, and/or "reeducati…

no straw men in sight. that's your choice: efficiency, equality, liberty...pick how you want to trade them off. if you think liberty is the only value that matters, that's a (questionable) values choice. if you think liberty always leads to efficiency, that's a questionable (IMHO clearly wrong) analysis.

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

#232
Ok here' some other contractor news, Serco in the UK under fraud investigation home of their corporate offices, one of the exchange contingency contracts given at the last minute as well as Equifax...

http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/2013/07/government-gives-cont...

http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/2013/07/obama-administration-...

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

#233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do not let this discourage you. The stories are, sadly, quite accurate depending on which company you work for (there are better situations than bodyshops) but we can't afford to give up. Dive in and help change things. This is a monumental challenge that requires more people that know a better way and are willing to act.

I agree that some suck less than others but being a government contractor will always suck more than working in private industry (even as a contractor). Just to not be a totally cynical asshole, I have heard NOAA is actually pretty modernized and efficient and everyone I've talked to seemed to be happy working there. I'd also add that while the place I was at had its share of crap, the government for the most part lo…

Yeah, it may suck more sometimes than supporting private industry, but the mission is critically important. The United States needs to get government working more effectively and this stuff has to be fixed. We need more dedicated, smart, technology-focused people to embrace the suck and fix it. Fixing it will change lives, and the way our government serves citizens for generations. Seems like a worthwhile endeavor to me, and at its lowest point at least a way to learn how NOT to do things haha.

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

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extra fun side notes: While holding a technical discussion about current tasking with a coworker in a "hallway meeting" our boss's boss and the gov-manager-who-signed-the-contract walked by. I was later reprimanded for chit chatting too much instead of working. Another issue, due to some contract specifics and my life situation I was able to decline healthcare coverage from my employer and I received that in salary c…

Another one: We had a government employee who was responsible for building our mess of a Java project (it was done by hand). It was error prone due to some self-referential build requirements, and the deployment of projects had to be done in a specific order. Generally a deploy took a couple tries. While I was there I skunkworks-implemented Jenkins CI (nee Hudson at the time) to deflect constantly getting blamed for…

The average government employee is beyond useless, and sadly the few who are good get a bad reputation and also a huge workload dumped on them by the majority.

One of the engagements I get called to once a week involves dealing with some gov employees. It had the odd property of continuing when the shutdown hit, so its the contractors and no gov people. Productivity on the project is completely unaffected. Half of the workforce gone, no change in productivity. There are certainly less meetings, so that's nice.

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

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As many as 20 million "tried to" sign up, based on their extrapolation of some polling data." The quote refers to "single digits" and it is ridiculous. If even close to 20 million people tried to sign up then that means many millions of citizens need this coverage and will likely end up getting it because having health insurance is critical to their livelihood. Am I to believe 20 million people needed health insuran…

We seem to be having completely different arguments. At no point did I say there was no demand for Obamacare. I'm saying the government has shown a remarkable level of incompetence at running what's essentially a simple lead gen website. I'm also suggesting that this probably doesn't bode well for the successful administration of the program. Regarding your second point, it's become somewhat of a meme in the press th…

Okay, I concede you didn't imply a lack of demand and that I misunderstood your primary point. For what it is worth you are making a lot of assumptions in order to make your point that Obamacare might not succeed.

My second point stands. Your experience of the media coverage, while valid, doesn't necessarily represent fact. You have to admit it is possible that a reporter managed to interview someone who signed up and you and your news sources were unaware. Even if you proved this point to be true what does it say? No one has signed up? People don't want to be interviewed? Obamacare will fail? I don't get it.

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

#236
post #65

I told https://www.healthcare.gov/ that I want to apply and live in New York. It immediately gave me a link to http://nystateofhealth.ny.gov/ . I clicked the link, and it says: > Access Denied > You don't have permission to access " http://nystateofhealth.ny.gov/" on this server. Why would the top level of such a site have permissions at all?

[deleted]

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

#237
There's a 5,534 line file (dummyData.js) and a 6000+ line (register.js) file, un-minified, with with global functions currently on the site. I would be fired for putting this sort of thing into production. For the $, there's no excuse for this.

https://www.healthcare.gov/marketplace/global/en_US/js/ee/du... https://www.healthcare.gov/marketplace/global/en_US/registra...

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

#238
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To play devils advocate, have you tried logging into Aetna, Cigna, Blue Cross Blue Shield, etc recently? Just as fucked in terms of passwords being screwed, lockouts, other such nonsense.

No, but I've signed in to Facebook, Google, Reddit, etc. It's a solved problem.

Most cutting edge computer science folks like to make money selling ads not selling cheap insurance.

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

#239
post #73
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds awesome! I'll put in a bid, then hire the cheapest programmers I can to make it look like I did some work, then of course I'll lose the competition and still get paid for 3 months. Repeat and you have a viable business. And you never need to actually support software after the 3 months is up.

Well, you wouldn't let anyone enter the process: there'd still have to be an initial filter. After that, presumably promise of much much higher future profits for the full contract and prestige (i.e. the free advertising that would come from having done it) would be sufficient. But it was just an idea anyway.

My point was mainly that there are plenty of bad actors out there, and any procurement system has to protect against them as a major goal.
Post reply on HN