Slashdot Mirror


FBI Delays Computer-System Contract

Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "The FBI postponed until 2006 the awarding of a huge computer-overhaul contract, gun-shy after a $170 million failed first effort, the Wall Street Journal reports: 'Much is riding on the project's success. Congress and other overseers pilloried the FBI for its reliance on paper records, forms and file cabinets. The FBI only last year completed the rollout of the Internet to its agents and analysts. And even though the bureau installed a computerized case-management system in the mid-1990s, it relied largely on aging, less-agile technology to do so. And it did little to eliminate the department's notorious number of paper forms -- currently numbering more than 1,000.'"

8 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The cheapest solution is readily available! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They also largely eliminated kidnapping-for-ransom because they have a 100% rate of catching criminals in those cases.

    They are the numero-uno agency in charge kidnapping cases, and are very very good at it.

    Besides, without them criminals could play hopscotch and avoid effecting law enforcement by skipping across state lines.

  2. Re:The cheapest solution is readily available! by RexRhino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, when the FBI started, they were not a police force. FBI agents were not allowed to carry guns, and the FBI was largely a small agency used to coordinate local police forces investigations for crime that crossed state borders. If the FBI was downsized to it's very limited non-law-enforcement role, it would arguably be constitutional.

  3. Efficiency by mrogers · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's good to know those forms will now be scanned in and turned into 1,000 PDFs. That should lead to an enormous increase in efficiency.

  4. Conspiracykiller by slashedmydot · · Score: 4, Funny

    When I watched The X-Files 10 years ago I thought: "this is bullshit, the government is way to incompetent for that kind of stuff".

    These kind of screwups are very effective conspiracykillers...

  5. It's amazing by confusion · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It really is amazing that they can spend that kind of money and have nothing to show for it... All the while, they're hunting criminals trying to screw the government - sounds like they should look inside.

    Jerry
    http://www.cyvin.org/

  6. Re:huh? by bdot2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    They spent over 105 million dollars on a software project called the "virtual case file" to support this. The project failed. IEEE Spectrum magazine has a long article that dissects the project in their September issue. Here is a link:

    http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/sep05/1455

    It is an interesting and sad story.

  7. Just what we need... a uber database for FBI by ATeamMrT · · Score: 4, Insightful
    wasn't something put in with the patriot-act that dumped money in the fbi for a huge database overhall. something to enable crosschecks between agencies. if i'm not wrong, what else are they in need of updating?

    We don't need to have every database cross checked. All we need is one FBI database for the dangerous criminals, the murderers and corporate criminals. Before long, states will check other states databases for minor criminal offenses. I'll give one example- try getting a job as a realtor. Arkansas will check their database to see if anyone is behind on payments for state guarenteed loans (like school loans). If you are, Arkansas will not give you a license. Oklahoma has the same law. What will happen the way the system is now, is the guy from Arkansas will move to Oklahoma and get a job there. By having every state cross check every other state, people will not be allowed to start over. Maybe Joe Sixpack went to State U, ran himself into $40,000 in debt, and feels he can never overcome such a large amount of debt.

    Or what about minor crimes? What if someone at the age of 20 decided to join the Alabama KKK? That person never broke a crime, just went to protests and meetings. At age 24 the person quits, and two years later moves to New York. Should New York know about his prior membership because of some anti-terrorism database? I know what everyone is thinking, the KKK is bad, so screw that person. I'll give a counter example, same facts as above, but instead of KKK the person is a member of PETA where his cohorts raid a university research center and free test animals.

    Are we still a free nation, or a nation where everyone has a history stored in a database?

    What is going to happen is some start-up in Cali will offer a service, checking a person through every state and FBI database. Once that becomes profitable, forget about ever trying to get a job for more than minimum wage if you have a blemish on your record. It will be the same thing employers are doing with checking credit reports before hiring workers.

    We need less databases, and more privacy laws.

  8. Replacing paper is not the solution by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Years ago I arrived on Frankfurt airport on a flight from Bangkok. On arrival, it turned out that the local computer systems responsible for running all the gate assignments and platform traffic were down, and were not going to be up in the comming hours. As it turns out, the local airport staff had a complete paper based system in place still and managed to keep the place running with relatively little delay, thanks to tons of paper forms, and an obviously well thought out system that worked regardless of those computers (tho it is probably a lot cheaper and more efficient to run it with computers of course)

    In other words, if your system is simply too complex to manage then you may have a problem right there. Throwing computer power at it to better keep track is no alternative to thinking up a better system, it is just a good tool for making it more efficient.

    Of course using a more efficient system opens up new possibilities, thats not the point, but no number of computers is going to reduce 1000 forms to a more managable number by itself.