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

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

digitaltrends.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 239 posts

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

#81

Post by raleec »

tokenadult wrote: post #57

National Public Radio had a good report on 8 October 2013, "Health Exchange Tech Problems Point To A Thornier Issue," http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/10/08/230424... that discusses the broader issue of United States federal government contracting for information technology services. Some reforms are suggested in that story that would help more competent startup companies compete against the establishe…

I don't understand why the IRS model isn't used more widely. Imagine if the Feds just maintained a backend server, with a published API, and paid $X/completed application.

I'm not sure what hoops the tax processing sites have to go through, but people are at least as protective of that data as their medical records.

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

#82

Post by dfc »

dfxm12 wrote: post #75
dfc wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some sharp people working the Federal side, but it really is awful. What are you referring to with "it"? The folks at your company who do federal IT work? Government IT employees? Federal IT consulting?

the parent post seems to be referring to bidding for & working with the federal government on government contracts.

The sentence is:

"There are some sharp people working the Federal side, but it really is awful."

The "it" section is after the comma and not part of its own sentence. Maybe you could (I wouldn't) make that inference if it read:

"There are some sharp people working the Federal side. But it really is awful."

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

#83

Post by ktavera »

For all of you that didn't know, this project was never put out for bid with an RFP. It was sole-sourced to CGI Federal without any competitive bids.

"Federal health officials have not yet explained why CGI was given the contract or why it was awarded on a sole-source basis."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/some-say-h...

[Edit to add source]

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

#84

Post by puller »

pkorzeniewski wrote: post #14

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!".

Part of this is confirmation bias. There's no shortage of private web sites which were costly, look like shit, work like shit and are easy to hack. We just don't take any notice. We see a strikingly bad government site, it makes us angry and we compare it to top 10% or top 1% websites in our heads.

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

#85

Post by ScottWhigham »

This is what frustrates me about many of our non-USA HN'ers here: every time the state sponsored health care issue comes up, the non-USA folks can't wait to talk about how their country has it, or how it costs this little to get coverage for this or that problem in their country, and then they wonder why "you Americans" put up with the system you have currently in place (self-insured, no state plans - pre-Obamacare). I've read my share of comments (often from European HN'ers) that mock USA citizens' mentality with regard to state sponsored health care here.

Well here you go - this is the perfect example to share with you as to why most Americans didn't/don't want "Obamacare". We, the voters, have no confidence that the current system+administration+Congress (or previous 10 of each!) could've created a system for "health insurance for all" that worked and was efficient. It's not anything against Obama - it's that we've seen administration after administration try to implement some big, sweeping group/plan for 20+ years and every one of them has turned into an inefficient holy hell of a mess. The most recent example of a major #$%&-up is Homeland Security (which I think is the last major agency created).

If the American public believed that the current government was capable of delivering state sponsored health care in an efficient way, every Democrat and Republican in this country would've voted for it. So don't think of "those who are against Obamacare" as anti-Obama, but rather anti-inefficiency (or anti-bigger government).

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

#86

Post by spiffyman »

wikiburner wrote: post #51
josefresco wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beware of potentially politically motivated garbage quotes. The referenced Washington Post article quoted an "insurance industry official" who would only speak anonymously: “Very, very few people that we’re aware of have enrolled in the federal exchange,” said one insurance industry official, who like many in the industry, spoke on the condition of anonymity out of concern for possibly offending the Obama administrat…

How about the CBS video linked above? Or the links below? Or the countless other media accounts of the launch being a "complete disaster"? Or all the comments on this very page of HNers not being able to use the site? Not even the administration's biggest defenders are trying to spin this as a successful launch. Are you really implying the media as a whole is biased against Obama? http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505269_1…

I don't think anyone's denying that this launch is a failure. It's clear as day. josefresco's point, though, seemed to be that this particular quote could easily have been politically motivated. None of the articles you link restate that 'single digits' claim. One of them even states the number could be upwards of 20M.

Just saying: take the 'single digits' claim with a grain of salt. You don't need to buy every ridiculous claim about this to acknowledge that this is a bad launch.

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

#87

Post by wikiburner »

tokenadult wrote: post #57

National Public Radio had a good report on 8 October 2013, "Health Exchange Tech Problems Point To A Thornier Issue," http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/10/08/230424... that discusses the broader issue of United States federal government contracting for information technology services. Some reforms are suggested in that story that would help more competent startup companies compete against the establishe…

I wonder if there's an idea for a startup for startups here:

Navigating Govermental Bureaucratic Morass as a Service

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

#88

Post by kwhite »

As more and more legislation starts to be implemented via online apps, it seems almost inevitable that hacktivists will eventually attempt a filibuster by DDoS. Given the turbulent launch of the new federal healthcare exchanges, my confidence that the government would be able to handle such an attack is rapidly diminishing.

I wonder how the political climate might shift if the threat of a de facto 'Annonymous veto' became something that policy makers actually had to worry about. On the up shot, it might finally force law makers to gain a responsible level of internet literacy...

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

#89

Post by nutate »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #53

I lost my group health plan, which I had for fifteen years, recently so I has experienced the web site first hand :-) My latest complaint: I logged in many times last week to fill in information, a bit at a time before I lost access. Then starting Sunday morning I could no longer login. On the phone last night I was told that they had wiped all stored passwords and to follow the "I don't remember my password" link. C…

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.

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

#90

Post by enoch_r »

dfc wrote: post #82
dfxm12 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the parent post seems to be referring to bidding for & working with the federal government on government contracts.

The sentence is: "There are some sharp people working the Federal side, but it really is awful." The "it" section is after the comma and not part of its own sentence. Maybe you could (I wouldn't) make that inference if it read: "There are some sharp people working the Federal side. But it really is awful."

It's similar to the sentence "Bob got a new girlfriend, but she is awful." "It" refers to "the Federal side."
Post reply on HN