Slashdot Mirror


What Developers Can Learn From Healthcare.gov

An anonymous reader writes "Soured by his attempt to acquire a quote from healthcare.gov, James Turner compiled a short list of things developers can learn from the experience: 'The first highly visible component of the Affordable Health Care Act launched this week, in the form of the healthcare.gov site. Theoretically, it allows citizens, who live in any of the states that have chosen not to implement their own portal, to get quotes and sign up for coverage. I say theoretically because I've been trying to get a quote out of it since it launched on Tuesday, and I'm still trying. Every time I think I've gotten past the last glitch, a new one shows up further down the line. While it's easy to write it off as yet another example of how the government (under any administration) seems to be incapable of delivering large software projects, there are some specific lessons that developers can take away. 1) Load testing is your friend.'"

267 comments

  1. What can they learn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Bribing the procurement officer gets you juicy gov tenders ... yes muthafuka! dats true!

    1. Re:What can they learn by DragonTHC · · Score: 5, Informative

      How about this one, hire an Indian firm to run a government level oracle database without actually testing it or including load-balancing and you're gonna have a bad time.

      Blame your horrendous failure on user volume and then call it glitches and you're gonna have a bad time.

      List of known issues in order of appearance:

      01. security questions not loading.
      02. security answers failing validation.
      03. email validation tokens timing out instantly.
      04. correct passwords failing
      05. password reset emails not providing clickable link for reset
      06. password reset link loads page which doesn't find the profile it just emailed to.
      07. EIDM server crashing and throwing system down errors.
      08. oracle server errors.
      09. network gateway timeout errors.
      10. oracle account manager loading towards public

      All of this excluding the actual waiting pages for a website.
      This is either gross incompetence or sabotage.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    2. Re:What can they learn by sycodon · · Score: 1

      Why are they even writing user authentication code and associated functions? Been done a million times. Should be able to get a plug in that's been running for years. Hell, they could have bought the code to Apple's site or a similar site and just modified it. Selling shit is selling shit. Computers with many options are no different than policies with many options.
       

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    3. Re:What can they learn by DragonTHC · · Score: 3, Funny

      I just successfully logged in. to a blank page.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    4. Re:What can they learn by Jstlook · · Score: 1

      You missed other issues that *also* appear:

      Failure to communicate with users when errors occur.
      Failure to communicate when the system is broken.
      Failure to communicate critical errors to your own staff.
      Failure to create a realistic timeframe for necessary repairs.

      Seriously. Why, when the system won't work at all, should I have to spend my time trying time and time again to even create an account? When I talk to the help and they say "keep trying", I act like a bloody fool by trying again. When I talk to the help and they say "It will be up in two or three hours", I assume that they've been told information that is roughly accurate!

      --
      ---jstlook ---For that is the way of Elves, for they say both yes AND no, and mean every word of it. --- J.R.R.T.
    5. Re:What can they learn by greg1104 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I predict the way you're using two digits to count the errors is going to turn into a scalability limit.

    6. Re:What can they learn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh so I have not encountered enough problems yet!! I cannot get past stage 3 the "2 or more questions answers cannot be the same". I even tried single characters "A,B,C".

      I am confused how it these failures can be due to "overload". This is the line trotted out by the "live help" window....

      Does anyone know why the system is so inconsistent? Is it just really bad code?

      I want/need to sign-up like many others but the IT in me, wants to know why......!

    7. Re:What can they learn by mikael · · Score: 1

      Have you tried calling the helpline:

      1-800-F**CKYO (1-800-318-2596)

      http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/03/need-health-care-coverage-just-dial-1-800-fuckyo-to-reach-obamacares-national-hotline/

      There's also story doing the rounds that if you don't already have health-insurance, then they'll put you on a list, suspend your driving license and place federal-liens against your home.

      http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/10/obamacare-conspiracy-theory-lien-house-debunked

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    8. Re:What can they learn by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      How about this one, hire an Indian firm to run a government level oracle database without actually testing it or including load-balancing and you're gonna have a bad time.

      For the amount of money they spent on healthcare.gov they could have hired call centers in low cost southern states to handle all of the signups by phone. Unglamorous and low tech, but effective. What matters here is getting the job done, not how pretty and mobile friendly your awesome website is (except that it doesn't work). In fact, the failed launch of healthcare.gov is a perfect metaphor for the Obama administration itself, it looks good and has plenty of style but it has a hard time getting anything useful done.

    9. Re:What can they learn by TheRealHocusLocus · · Score: 2

      > I predict the way you're using two digits to count the errors is going to turn into a scalability limit.

      Not if the error sequence number follows the convention used in IBM RPG/400 1.1.4.4. "Sequence Numbering of the Listing after a Compile" ... "The high order 2 digits of the sequence number are made up of the characters A through Z and 0 through 9 in the following order: A, B, C, ..., Z, 1, 2, ..., 9, A0, AA, AB, ..., AZ, A1, A2, ..., A9, B0, BA, ..., ZZ, ..., Z9, 10, ..., 99. This structure allows for up to 1295 different increments of the high order sequence number. " ... it is worth noting that this counting sequence does not sort properly in ASCII or even native EBCDIC [A9,B0,BA] which leads Real Programmers away from the messy realms of real-world problems into the comfortable zone of devising elaborate workarounds for problems they had created.

      Sometimes delving into the structure of ancient computer architectures and programming languages yields new and clever insights into old problems. This is not one of those times.

      --
      <blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
    10. Re:What can they learn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either they are still building out the site as we speak or or slowly "allowing" the site to progress.. Here's a conspiracy for you: While the budget debate goes on and there is a chance at the Affordable Care Act being reformed/defunded.etc; the the powers that be who favor the ACA do no want users to witness the sticker shock of what pretty much amounts to catastrophic insurance for the price of a Cadillac plan: $300+/month for a $6500 deductible, covering 70% of the costs after, and $80 doctor copays is not affordable. I was paying $40/month for a catastrophic plan with a $2500 deductible 3 years ago. If I wanted to goto the doctor, it was $100 cash and doctors would work with you as long as you had the cash to pay.

    11. Re: What can they learn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You hit the nail in the head. "Indian company" are the keywords here. And not the native american indian kind, they would have built this without a glitch.

  2. Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Let's have our great media investigate if this is poor planning...or good planning if once the initial load gets through then they didn't overspend on equipment they don't need.

    Or if there is a secret effort by the people who want this to fail to hire botnets and hackers to DDOS it... I wouldn't put it past them.

    1. Re:Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let's have our great media investigate if this is poor planning...or good planning if once the initial load gets through then they didn't overspend on equipment they don't need.

      Or if there is a secret effort by the people who want this to fail to hire botnets and hackers to DDOS it... I wouldn't put it past them.

      Would be something to see a considerable amount of traffic going out from Newscorp ip addresses into the healthcare.gov servers.

      nothing unusual, aside a few million malformed packets...

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 2

      Let's have our great media investigate if this is poor planning...or good planning if once the initial load gets through then they didn't overspend on equipment they don't need.

      Or if there is a secret effort by the people who want this to fail to hire botnets and hackers to DDOS it... I wouldn't put it past them.

      Would be something to see a considerable amount of traffic going out from Newscorp ip addresses into the healthcare.gov servers.

      nothing unusual, aside a few million malformed packets...

      That would be an even more stupid idea than Newscorp buying MySpace.

      Project Managers can learn giving only minimal time for QA, at the very end of the project, with no time allotted for corrections is bad practice.

    3. Re:Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by lq_x_pl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
      I'd have a hard time believing that the servers have been this consistently overwhelmed with traffic. A more likely explanation is that a poorly designed system was patched together from components hastily built from a thousand different vendors. The web-app equivalent of a diesel engine held together with duct-tape and baling wire was then rolled out without any real testing.
      The only time, "Good enough for government work," has ever escaped my lips was when I was confronted with a marginally functional mess of spaghetti code.

      --
      An internal system operation returned the error "The operation completed successfully.".
    4. Re:Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by ackthpt · · Score: 2

      Let's have our great media investigate if this is poor planning...or good planning if once the initial load gets through then they didn't overspend on equipment they don't need.

      Or if there is a secret effort by the people who want this to fail to hire botnets and hackers to DDOS it... I wouldn't put it past them.

      Would be something to see a considerable amount of traffic going out from Newscorp ip addresses into the healthcare.gov servers.

      nothing unusual, aside a few million malformed packets...

      That would be an even more stupid idea than Newscorp buying MySpace.

      Project Managers can learn giving only minimal time for QA, at the very end of the project, with no time allotted for corrections is bad practice.

      "Are we meeting with some network engineers, tech writers and systems analysts?"

      "No, we are meeting with a bunch of appointees who know next to nothing about the guts of the project.

      "Great... we may as well watch cartoons."

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    5. Re:Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are surely looking for any excuse possible for their pathetic failures here. If there was a DDOS, then they would surely let us know.

    6. Re:Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by hawguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

      I'd have a hard time believing that the servers have been this consistently overwhelmed with traffic. A more likely explanation is that a poorly designed system was patched together from components hastily built from a thousand different vendors. The web-app equivalent of a diesel engine held together with duct-tape and baling wire was then rolled out without any real testing.

      The only time, "Good enough for government work," has ever escaped my lips was when I was confronted with a marginally functional mess of spaghetti code.

      You needn't source from multiple vendors to get a system that falls apart under load - single vendor solutions are also susceptible to such problems.. Even if you specify load testing in the contract, that doesn't mean that their load test had any relation to actual real-world load. Of course, the hard part is predidcting what load to expect, especially with a system that has a potential audience of 100+ million people.

    7. Re:Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

      definitely not a DDOS. LOIC is going to cause the kinds of errors I've seen.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    8. Re:Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by funwithBSD · · Score: 0

      Look at the instuctions:

      “The username is case sensitive. Choose a username that is 6-74 characters long and must contain a lowercase or capital letter, a number, or one of these symbols _.@/-.”

      If I can use those, can I do this:

      http://xkcd.com/327/

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    9. Re:Real demand or Right-Wing DDOS? by RyoShin · · Score: 1

      And it's not just that, it's also about handling both expected average load and initial max load. If you focus on just max load, you'll wind up capacity that just sits around. If you focus on just average capacity, you run into problems like this (which is assuming they can get roughly the right estimate in the first place.) So a good plan needs to have something where it can account for max load (perhaps offload image hosting to CDNs and non-privacy-related data processing to AWS or something?) but not have a bunch of extra, idling capacity when the initial furor dies down.

  3. Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by ackthpt · · Score: 2

    No accountability of the contractors, no accountability of those who were to oversee the contractors and no accountability of the people who were to oversee those overseeing the contractors.

    and I was ønce bitten by a møøse nø realli!

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      working in the trenches on one of the state projects, it's clear that the main problem was the inability for the state overseers to make up their mind on the most basic of concepts. This cost us huge amounts of time and resources.

    2. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some states have been ready for months.
      Didn't I read on /. that the first testing of healthcare.gov was scheduled for September 30?

    3. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Informative

      I went through the site and found it responsive. Possibly the time of day and my western timezone had something to say about it, but had no issues.

      Even CNN looks bad when something major happens and everyone hits them at once, despite humming along for months without any issues.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 5, Informative

      Having worked in government offices, I can tell you this is the real problem.

      Because there are so many laws about making the government use contractors instead of hiring employees (because private sector is allegedly so much more efficient), damn near everything has to be contracted out. Then the contractors fail to deliver, they go over budget and come in way behind schedule. The government has no choice but to pay them and accept their useless work, again, due to more laws about "helping the private sector".

      There's no way to fire a contractor or even to hold them to their original contract. They agreed to do something for a certain price? Too bad, they're going to sue the government and use those biased laws in order to deliver less than half of what they promised at more than 3 times the price they quoted and agreed to.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    5. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Albanach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not sure load testing alone would be the solution. For a site like this, I see little point in making the expenditure to handle all the day 0 traffic.

      Rather they should have load tested to find out how many users they could safely serve. Then they should have simply restricted the number of active connections. Other users should have seen a static holding page. That way, everyone that gets through gets a good experience.

      By adopting this approach, you can save money. And, given the publicity available pre launch, they could easily have explained how this would work so as to manage expectations. After the first few week or so, they would likely be able to manage the traffic comfortably.

    6. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by DaTrueDave · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is exactly what I have seen over the last couple of decades. Your comments seem to be directed at contracted projects, but I see ongoing federal contracts that hire minimum wage employees to replace skilled federal employees. The costs are more than the costs to hire federal employees and the corporation pockets a nice profit, but the services are substandard. Contractors are supposedly an overall cost savings because if the need for the work moves or disappears, there are no federal employees to move or RIF. The problem is that some of these contracts have been ongoing for decades, and are coming close to the length of a federal employee's entire career!

      Federal contracts do NOT save money, but they do profit the corporations that donate to politicians' political campaigns.

    7. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to suggest that individuals working in government jobs use their position and power to sabatoge things they disagree with, like Obamacare.

      But I guess it's gone further than that and become institutionalized.

    8. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You apparently didn't try logging in or signing up for an account.

    9. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1. release to a controlled group
      2. release to a small population state like Montana
      3. release to 5 more states
      4. keep releasing in bits

      test, fix, test, etc.
      Among all don't let law makers mandate how things should be release by setting one national date.

    10. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Not only that but my private insurance carrier's website was down on Oct 1 as well. It just doesn't make sense to purchase the extra capacity when it's going to stabilize after a few days. After all people have 3 months to sign up and it's not going to "run out" of insurance.

    11. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then they should have simply restricted the number of active connections. Other users should have seen a static holding page. That way, everyone that gets through gets a good experience.

      They do exactly that. But the queues are huge and the site still does not work after you get in because it has other critical bugs besides capacity problems.

      A much smarter approach would have been a gradual rollout: First weeks, limited to health professionals only, who would give the most poignant feedback. Then Arkansas. Yes, those fuckers should be the betatesters because they sent all four Rs in the House. And so on, expand gradually and work on scaling problems as they happen, order new hardware etc.

    12. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the government is spending other peoples money.

    13. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by seyfarth · · Score: 1

      I worked for NASA about 30 years ago and experienced a similar situation. The plan was that NASA employees were supposed to write job orders for Lockheed employees to work on. There were several of us NASA people who generally wrote Fortran instead of job orders. We were pretty good and this seemed reasonable to us. Now Lockheed did have some good programmers too, though they were only about 75% successful with their hiring. I did write some job orders and once or twice I ran into someone who was unproductive. Overall it worked fairly well, though I thought it would be better for all involved to work directly for NASA. I don't think that the government can count on successful contracting any more than successful government employees. If government employees are only paper pushers, then we have a large amount of wasted effort in management.

      --
      Ray Seyfarth, ray.seyfarth@gmail.com, http://rayseyfarth.blogspot.com
    14. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by lissnup · · Score: 1

      I like this suggestion, it's practical, relatively easy to implement, and extensible to include timed refresh or some method of creating a "waiting list" - something many sites might benefit from.

    15. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you were forwarded to state exchange you have a totally different experience

    16. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...to replace skilled federal employees."

      Don't be silly. There's no such thing as a skilled federal employee.

    17. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rolling out a complex web site with tens of millions of potential motivated users is a questionable tactic.

      There is enough slack time in this insurance purchase process that not everyone needed to do it on Oct 1. It would have made more sense to allow initial account registration based on initial letter of the last name, or final digit of the SSN. That would have reduced first-day stress on the servers and databases, and limited bad experiences if anything was dysfunctional. Two alphabet letters per day would have kept traffic reasonable and only have delayed individuals no more than two weeks.

      I can remember decades ago snail mailing for some cereal boxtop premium, and waiting weeks for delivery. Builds character, or at least patience. But I want my internet transactions completed NOW!!!! The internet, for all its power, continues to cancel millenia of human evolution. Farmers understand you can't harvest a fish the same day you plant it. FedUPS users don't.

    18. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Kyont · · Score: 1

      > Farmers understand you can't harvest a fish the same day you plant it.

      Yep, you gotta be patient. I planted forty acres of fish years ago, and so far... bupkis!

      --
      You shall see a cow on the roof of a cotton house.
    19. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've no idea what you are talking about -- what laws "about making the government use contractors instead of hiring employees"? The Government has, in fact, been on an insourcing (converting contractor efforts to employees) kick since Obama took over. There is not a single law directing that work be contracted. The real, rational reason for contracting work is because if you hire more Federal employees, they're there for life and you and I have to pay for them. Why would you create an employee position and 30 years of salary and then a pension, plus benefits, for work that is designed, developed and done in eighteen months? That's why you have contractors, so that when the work is done, the money need not be spent anymore.

      You wrote "There's no way to fire a contractor or even to hold them to their original contract" ... um, yes, it's called the FAR (Federal Acquisition Regulations) and it governs EXACTLY how you hold a contractor to delivery standards. If anything, you should be saving your ire for Federal contracting officers who write poorly-constructed requests for proposals, and won't talk with contractors before bids are due. The better the CO defines the work, the cheaper the price the contractors can bid, because their risk is lower. You can also save your ire for the President and his "fixed price good, cost-plus bad" approach to contracting. You cannot possibly know what you're talking about and say that. Fixed price contracting is more expensive because it passes the risk to the contractor (duh), and should ONLY be used where the requirements are clearly defined, not for things like software development where the Government changes its requirements weekly. And finally, save your ire for the clown who developed "low-price, technically acceptable" (LPTA) bid requests and the contracting officers who use them for critical systems without regard to the contractor's past performance, staffing or capacity to manage the work.

      Amen.

    20. Re:Reminds me of vendor systems I deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I see ongoing federal contracts that hire minimum wage employees to replace skilled federal employees."

      Name one. Just one, where the Federal work is contracted out AND the employees of the contractor are paid "minimum wage" AND the replaced Federal employees lost their jobs AND they were "skilled" at what they did. Just one example, please. And then tell us how you know what the civil servants were paid and how you know the contractor employees were paid minimum wage.

      I'm asking because there is a thing called the Service Contract Act that provides minimum pay to contractors, in what would generally be low-wage contractor tasks. There is no way on God's green earth that a contractor can pay minimum wage, which pretty much suggests that you don't have a clue what you're talking about -- or are a union guy lying through his teeth.

  4. How is it even still up? by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nothing shows up the sheer arbitrariness of a government shutdown than some sites like Healthcare.gov being up, and others being forced to shut down at extra expense when they could have just been left running (and the servers that are there just to tell you the site is shut down are still consuming power and bandwidth).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's up because they had a separately authorized source of funds.

      Remember we haven't hit the debt limit yet, we hit the government budget limit.

    2. Re:How is it even still up? by nomadic · · Score: 1, Troll

      Nothing arbitrary about it; if the other side is trying to do an end-run around the democratic process to shut down a government program they don't like, why would you shut down that program for them?

    3. Re:How is it even still up? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1, Troll
      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    4. Re:How is it even still up? by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nothing shows up the sheer arbitrariness of a government shutdown than some sites like Healthcare.gov being up, and others being forced to shut down at extra expense when they could have just been left running (and the servers that are there just to tell you the site is shut down are still consuming power and bandwidth).

      One more time, because some people clearly haven't read it or heard it: The Affordable Healthcare Act is not affected because it was fully funded. The budget Continuing Resolution is for things which are not already funded.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    5. Re:How is it even still up? by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 2, Flamebait

      I wouldn't believe breitbart.com if it told me that the sky was blue.

    6. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yay, Breitbart. The pinnacle of journalistic integrity.

    7. Re:How is it even still up? by linuxguy · · Score: 1

      Please resists the urge to cite breitbart dailycaller or foxnews as your sources. These places do not have any credibility in many people's eyes.

    8. Re:How is it even still up? by hondo77 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Conservatives are outraged that their government shutdown caused some things to actually shut down. Film at 11.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    9. Re:How is it even still up? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Your disbelief is a different issue than the reports being wrong. But, I can understand your stance. Some people prefer to only drink from the approved water carriers, especially if news from other sources might cause uncomfortable facts and thoughts to creep into one’s mind. Rest easy with your approved news, citizen.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    10. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NPR is not a federal institution, you dope.

    11. Re:How is it even still up? by cold+fjord · · Score: 0, Troll

      Progressives and Democrats claim outrage that the government is shut down, but continue to resist efforts to open it - take targeted actions to magnify the pain. Film at 11.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    12. Re:How is it even still up? by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Also remember that we hit a time limit. October 1st is just the start of the fiscal year, and the shutdown is just waiting for direction on how the next year is going to run.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    13. Re:How is it even still up? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      "Liberals refuse to accept things they've see with their own eyes when it would mean they agree with a conservative. News at 11."

    14. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Either that or the fact that breitbart has a terrible history of axe-grinding, making stuff up and being just plain wrong. But that is ok. You are free to believe the hit job against them is a massive conspiracy between the socialist commi-nazis and the Friends of Hamas.

    15. Re:How is it even still up? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All that needs to happen is for Boehner to bring the Senate bill to the floor of the House and BOOM the government will reopen because there are enough moderate Republicans + Democrats to pass it.

      The idea that the Democrats are forcing the Government to close is ludicrous.

    16. Re:How is it even still up? by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Alright, I'll bite. One of those headlines is preposterous enough to warrant clicking... I wonder how exactly one pulls off a "private air" anything, what with the FAA, airports, and various safety groups all being government bodies...

      Okay, that wasn't too bad, just run-of-the-mill ignorance. It's private aircraft flying from a Marine base, and with no budget the military can't legally authorize the expense of opening the base and running the show. As expected, the article makes a big deal about a wholly-expected consequence. Maybe someone will point this out in the comments...

      OH DEAR GOD GET ME BACK TO SLASHDOT!

      My fellow Slashdotters, you folks are jackasses sometimes. So am I, I'm sure... but I thank you all heartily for at least being intelligent asshats.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    17. Re: How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even close

    18. Re:How is it even still up? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      The military isn't shut down.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    19. Re: How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And _who_ is the leader of the house who had not even presented the actual budget for a vote? That's what I thought...

    20. Re:How is it even still up? by hurfy · · Score: 2

      lol, no idea what the site was so had to check. Private airshow...was alternative to canceled military one....AT A MILITARY BASE... yup, totally not related to gov, eh? ;p

      Good to know there are still sites with 'better'headlines than us ;)

    21. Re:How is it even still up? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1, Insightful

      All that needs to happen is for Boehner to bring the Senate bill to the floor of the House and BOOM the government will reopen because there are enough moderate Republicans + Democrats to pass it.

      All that needed to happen for it not to happen at all is for the Senate Democrats to jump the party line and approve the continuing resolution the House had already passed.

      The idea that the Democrats are forcing the Government to close is ludicrous.

      They're the ones who control the Senate and decided to force a conference committee which they knew wasn't going to accept their version. They're also the party of the current President, who is refusing to negotiate. From here::

      But Democratic leaders Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the president reiterated that they would hold firm in their position.

      So, no, the Democrats are not the innocent party here. They'd rather see a shutdown than a delay in funding ACA which doesn't prevent the exchanges from opening anyway.

    22. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you bother to check you'll find that the military isn't shut down. To the extent that there are military shutdowns, it is calculated to cause pain, not to comply with budget issues.

    23. Re:How is it even still up? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 2

      I find that NPR reporting is probably the most neutral of all the broadcast news. Now before you start freaking out about commy liberal pinkos, I will say yes, there are individual commentators that have a liberal slant. But these are more like newspaper columnists. We know their perspective and can factor that in. But as far as the actual news reporting, it seems to be pretty factual. Strangely enough, I find that a lot of Fox news website stories have pretty decent reporting too; but then again I have avoided political stories there. But their TV broadcasts are total right wing shilling shite. Come to think of it, most of the print/website stories from most news orgs are decent. It is the broadcast stuff where essentially non-journalist commentators get involved where you find the various leanings.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    24. Re:How is it even still up? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      I wonder how exactly one pulls off a "private air" anything, what with the FAA, airports, and various safety groups all being government bodies...

      Use of public airspace does not make an airshow produced by private individuals a government function. Obtaining the necessary FAA waivers and TFRs and NOTAMs for an airshow does not make a private airshow a government function. There are private, state, city, and county run airports all over the place. And EAA is a private organization that regularly holds one of the largest aviation events in the world.

    25. Re: How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), leader of the Senate that didn't produce a budget for more than 1,400 days. It should be an annual event.

      1,400 Days Later, Still No Senate Budget

      Senator Reid still hasn't designated a conference committee to work with the House on the current budget matters.

      Is that who you thought?

    26. Re:How is it even still up? by hondo77 · · Score: 2

      Wrong. The Senate voted on the House's bill and rejected it. The House refuses to vote on the Senate's bill (because Boehner knows it will pass). It really is that simple.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    27. Re:How is it even still up? by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

      Wrong. The Senate voted on the House's bill and rejected it.

      How am I wrong when that's what I said? The Democrats in the Senate toed the party line and refused to pass the House continuing resolution, substituting their own, forcing the matter to a conference committee that they knew wouldn't accept their version. Had the Senate Democrats opted to avoid the shutdown, all they had to do was pass the House bill intact. It really was that simple.

    28. Re:How is it even still up? by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Nothing shows up the sheer arbitrariness of a government shutdown than some sites like Healthcare.gov being up, and others being forced to shut down at extra expense when they could have just been left running (and the servers that are there just to tell you the site is shut down are still consuming power and bandwidth).

      Apparently nearly every government agency under the sun has taken to sabotaging their sites to I assume make a statement about how much not getting paid sucks.

      While I understand it is still childish and offensive to taxpayers. I would respect an agency if their site and servers were actually shut down or if they left a message saying sorry content may not be up to date... very few I know anything about are actually doing that.

    29. Re:How is it even still up? by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      No, but much of their PR functions are. Who's going to clean up after the crowd coming in for the show? Who's going to stand out there at the table talking about airplane specs? And how are they justifying those expenses as "essential"?

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    30. Re:How is it even still up? by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Somebody has to approve the waivers, and those small airports still usually get federal funding, sometimes being the only reason they stay operational. I've helped organize an air show before, and there's a ton of paperwork that gets shuffled off to the federal government for approval. Even if the organizations involved are essential enough to stay operational, they still may not have the ability to spend money on frivolous things like approving air shows.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    31. Re:How is it even still up? by mattmarlowe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure, let's believe there is some neutral news site that we can all agree to use for news....

      But, first, let's agree to get rid of the partisan sources:
      NPR, CNN, nytimes, dailykos, slate, politico, washingtonpost on the left
      foxnews, breitbart, redstate, hotair, instapundit on the right

      What is left?

      Thanks for pointing out the need to ban references to these sites....it's a good things our founding fathers agreed to ban unapproved speech...we definitely should not trust even our adults to properly filter out biased news sources....

    32. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They even halted coverage of the NFL at overseas bases - specifically to piss off the military. Not one penny is saved by this action.

    33. Re:How is it even still up? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Somebody has to approve the waivers,

      The FAA has essential people still working.

      and those small airports still usually get federal funding,

      Small airports usually getting federal funding doesn't mean those small airports are closed during the shutdown, nor does that funding turn any of the private pilots who fly there into government agents.

      I've helped organize an air show before, and there's a ton of paperwork that gets shuffled off to the federal government for approval.

      You only need approval if you are going to do something that is outside the FAR. NOTAMs need to be processed even during the shutdown. Air traffic control is still staffed.

    34. Re: How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous coward to anonymous coward. You really need to read more of the constitution. All budget bills MUST originate in the House of Representatives. If the Senate or President disagrees with said budget it's up to the House to make one that all parties can agree on. Since the House now has a majority of Republicans it is henceforth the Republicans responsibility to make a budget that can be agreed on. Since they won't they own the shutdown. Trying to force someone to agree with you is coercion. Pure and simple.

    35. Re:How is it even still up? by firex726 · · Score: 1

      Had quite a few of these newer accounts and AC posting this sort of bullshit all over anything even remotely political.

    36. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The House refuses to vote on the Senate's bill because the House has to originate spending bills. It's the law.

    37. Re:How is it even still up? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > So, no, the Democrats are not the innocent party here. They'd rather see a shutdown than a delay in funding ACA which doesn't prevent the exchanges from opening anyway.

      A delay in funding of the ACA is not part of ANY bill provided by the House.

      The bills that were provided either completely defund the ACA or delay the individual mandate.

      It is utterly preposterous to engage in this sort of legislative action when people in many states are in the process of signing up for these programs. It would be nuts to change the law at this time. They are taking the scurrilous tactic of attaching a bill that would never pass on its own to a measure needed to run the rest of the government. It's despicable. It is a form of blackmail.

      The bills passed by the House also prohibit Congress and its employees from receiving a subsidy for the plans they purchase from the exchanges, (something every other employer who provides coverage offers) and they make optional various women's health programs. Including breast feeding services and battered wife counseling services.

      Ultimately trying to change policy as part of a continuing resolution is absolute insanity. These bills have have historically been limited to only technical changes in law.

      The last time this sort of shenanigans were tried was in 1995 when a Republican Congress tried to change the Medicare contribution rate. It too led to a government shutdown. Back then the Republicans were also rightly blamed for over-reaching.

      The history is there. The Republicans are repeating the same damn mistakes they made in 18 years ago. The will suffer the same outcome as before.

      There is nothing to negotiate. Policy decisions do not belong in a CR. By including policy changes in a CR the Republicans are forcing a shutdown.

      The fact remains that a clean CR would pass the House. It is the will of the representatives of the people who are elected by the voters to pass such a bill.

      The only people preventing the introduction and passage of this are the Republican leadership. It is THEIR decision to shut down the government of the United States.

    38. Re: How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Senate doesn't produce the budget, you barking fucking dittohead.

    39. Re:How is it even still up? by theskipper · · Score: 1

      Not sure I see the logic here, how exactly does your admonition work? You only supplied links to right-wing biased news sources (Newscorp, Carlson, Breitbart and Rev. Sun Myung Moon).

      So it appears you are saying that only water carriers representing one political philosophy are valid, and that for some reason they are "unapproved".

    40. Re: How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Senate produces a budget that has to be reconciled with the House version. You may want to educate yourself since it seems what you think you know is wrong. I notice you are liberal in passing out insults. Ironic, given the state of your knowledge.

      A Guide to the federal budget process

    41. Re: How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    42. Re:How is it even still up? by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      ACA implementation is mandatory spending and is not tied to the annual appropriations bills (source).

      Is that arbitrary? Perhaps, in the sense that the Democrats could have crafted the bill's funding mechanism differently (but were smart and/or lucky enough not to). But it's not like someone made that categorization decision of the top of his head just this week.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    43. Re:How is it even still up? by idunham · · Score: 1

      So when the servers for the exchange are this far from working on October 4, you think we should go ahead and fine anyone who hasn't gotten an approved insurance policy by Jan. 1?

    44. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Liberals refuse to accept things they've see with their own eyes when it would mean they agree with a conservative. News at 11."

      "Conservatives refuse to accept things they've see with their own eyes when it would mean they agree with a liberal. News at 11."

    45. Re:How is it even still up? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2

      Give me a break, there is a huge difference between NPR and Breitart. Breitbart has no journalistic standards and will run a story (e.g. the Acorn pimp scandal) well after the facts are clearly counter to what he's pushing. NPR prides itself on striving to be as non partisan and objective as possible.

      I'm so sick and tired of this false equivalency. Is there bias in every source of news? Yes. Even when you endeavor and pride yourself on trying to live up to an ideal you will screw up. Everyone is human and everyone will foul up. But Breitbart sets out with an agenda and will say whatever conveniently supports his beliefs.

      It's like comparing a psuedoscientific nut job like Burzynski to the American Cancer Society. Sure they both research cancer treatments. But Burzynski simply fabricates his research and the other while imperfect and sometimes recommending people take treatments that turn out to be ineffective are actually practicing real medicine and science.

      NPR and Fox news are not equivalent entities. Breitbart and CNN are not equivalent entities.

    46. Re:How is it even still up? by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      You forgot to reply to his last sentence.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    47. Re:How is it even still up? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Ultimately trying to change policy as part of a continuing resolution is absolute insanity. These bills have have historically been limited to only technical changes in law.

      My mouth drops every time I read this when Liberals post something like it. The naked hypocrisy is astounding. It was just three years ago for goodness sake, THEY PASSED THIS BILL USING BUDGET RECONCILIATION IN THE FIRST PLACE!

      So some how its okay when you do it but its not okay when the other side does? Just face facts, Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are all Assholes. Boehner is just treating them exactly how they treated him.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    48. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Liberals refuse to accept things they've see with their own eyes when it would mean they agree with a conservative. News at 11."

      "Conservatives refuse to accept things they've see with their own eyes when it would mean they agree with a liberal. News at 11."

      Both are true. Here we see the true nature of a more common trait: being American.

    49. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing arbitrary about it. It's a propaganda tactic to make people feel the "pain" of shutdown, by shutting down public facing services. Meanwhile they're still collecting taxes, murdering people, imprisoning peaceful people.

    50. Re:How is it even still up? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Your post is somewhat amusing since my account is older than yours by a fair amount.
      .

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    51. Re:How is it even still up? by magic+maverick+ · · Score: 1

      "But, first, let's agree to get rid of the partisan sources:"
      NPR is maybe vaguely left (or at least not right).
      CNN, aka the conservative news network.
      "nytimes, dailykos, slate, politico, washingtonpost" all on the right.
      "foxnews, breitbart, redstate, hotair, instapundit on the right".

      OK, so there aren't actually any left news sources? Color me shocked that the mainstream media are all a bunch of right-wing crazy fucknuts who don't actually provide a real alternative on the left. What, you mean that big capitalist institutions are more likely to support capitalism? Who'd a thunk it?!

      --
      HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
    52. Re:How is it even still up? by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Boehner is just treating them exactly how they treated him.

      Boehner didn't initiate or want this fight. He took it up because of the Tea Party movement within the House.

    53. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      suffering the same outcome of reducing spending while maintaining control of the house and picking up seats in the senate like the last big shutdown wouldn't be so bad

      the president could have avoided all of this by simply following the law in the beginning of the year and submitting a timely budget people could work with. instead it was such a mess no one wanted to touch it. he also has this strange political strategy of simply avoiding the job.

    54. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are closing military cemeteries in France (from World War II), even locking up the Washington War memorial and private car parks next to privately run parks.

    55. Re:How is it even still up? by DeadlyBattleRobot · · Score: 1

      NPR is a different kind of propaganda news source. About three weeks ago, I think it was a Saturday, they actually ran a hit piece segment criticizing Syria intervention skeptics and satirists like John Stewart, as naive and destructive. Their reports ran day after day with pro war on Syria for weeks before.
       

    56. Re:How is it even still up? by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      The House Leadership is not using budget reconciliation for anything. They are refusing to attend reconciliation which is the natural course of any bill.

    57. Re:How is it even still up? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone attend such a thing when the other side is publicly stating they won't negotiate?

      Face it the AFCA got passed by abusing the parliamentary rules, to keep it out of committee where the minority would certainly have killed it. That is how our system is supposed to work, minority rights are supposed to be protected. The Left thwarted those checks and balance to get the Act passed.

      Now they are crying that the right is using the same sort of abuse to try an undermine it. Its a hollow complaint.

      All that has to happen is the President and Senate agree to delay a small part of the Act, not even repeal or permanently modify it and the shutdown could be over immediately. They won't even talk about. The House is not the bad actor here; or if it is its no worse an actor than the Reid or Obama.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    58. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Had the Senate Democrats opted to avoid the shutdown, all they had to do was pass the House bill intact."
      Thereby ignoring the expressed wishes of the people. See "Presidential Elections in 2008 & 2012" for the poll numbers.
      Seem to remember in 2008 that the winner ran on the idea of universal single payer health care, and the loser in 2012 ran on shutting down ACA on his first day in office.

    59. Re:How is it even still up? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      You forgot to reply to his last sentence.

      You should read all the words. He said they may not have money to approve "frivolous airshows" (which often dump a ton of money into the local economy, which makes them less than frivolous). And I said "you only need approval if you do something outside the FAR."

      "They may not have people to approve..." "You only need approval if ..." See how the second sentence covers the first?

      Sheesh. First grade reading level, guy.

    60. Re:How is it even still up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People working for the Feds will get paid for the time that the government was shutdown. This is just an unscheduled holiday for most of them.

  5. Blame Canada? by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Canadian firm hired to build troubled Obamacare exchanges

    A Canadian tech firm that has provided service to that country's single-payer health care system is behind the glitch-ridden United States national health care exchange site healthcare.gov.

    CGI Federal is a subsidiary of Montreal-based CGI Group. With offices in Fairfax, Va., the subsidiary has been a darling of the Obama administration, which since 2009 has bestowed it with $1.4 billion in federal contracts, according to USAspending.gov.

    The "CGI" in the parent company's name stands for "Conseillers en Gestion et Informatique" in French, which roughly translates to "Information Systems and Management Consultants." However, the firm offers another translation: "Consultants to Government and Industry."

    The company is deeply embedded in Canada’s single-payer system. CGI has provided IT services to the Canadian Ministries of Health in Alberta, British Columbia, New Brunswick, Quebec and Saskatchewan, as well as to the national health provider, Health Canada, according to CGI's Canadian website.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    1. Re:Blame Canada? by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

      It's a Quebec company... they're fucked. It's like hiring a "European" company which just happens to be run out of Sicily. They're so stupidly corrupt there, that I can honestly say they deserved it.

    2. Re:Blame Canada? by quantaman · · Score: 2

      According to the article the project has been behind schedule for a while:

      Earlier this year the U.S. Government Accountability Office criticized the pace of development and testing for Healthcare.gov.'s IT system and noted that it was missing important milestone deadlines.

      This is worrying as it suggests this isn't the case of a few glitches and poor load testing, the project might simply not be done.

      In defence of CGI (since I'm Canadian and will reflexively look for excuses for my cultural brethren) it's not uncommon for software projects to miss launch dates, they just seem to be in the unfortunate position of having to launch anyways. The other excuse is that their requirements exploded when 34 states refused to join ObamaCare and had to be handled by the Federal exchange.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    3. Re:Blame Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having to deal with the aftermath of CGI's "products" in the Canadian government, I am not surprised. Their contractors have been consistently horrible, and they also like to keep all documentation to them selves and build their own MVC framework from scratch on purpose.

    4. Re:Blame Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should have looked at the results of CGI's involvement in Alberta. Tata would have done a better job, and I think everyone is aware of the quality of Tata's work.

    5. Re:Blame Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have worked indirectly for CGI... There is no defending them; they are corrupt and incompetent to the core. Also if they are involved there is almost certainly many many many unnescesary layers of contractors and subcontractors.

    6. Re:Blame Canada? by GovCheese · · Score: 1

      Since a Canadian firm was contracted, apologies were likely written into the contract well ahead of time, because Canada.

      --
      "He's using a quantum encryption scheme! That'll take hours to break!"
    7. Re:Blame Canada? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Find me an honest large firm and I'll show you Napoleon in a flying car.

    8. Re:Blame Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The other excuse is that their requirements exploded when 34 states refused to join ObamaCare and had to be handled by the Federal exchange."

      Which is complete aand utter horse shit. There was a 100 percent chance that ate least one state would not participate and the chance that at least two would tell teh feds to fuckoff was almost as high. Designing a system that supports N states instead of 2 isn't that much extra effort.

      The real problem is that the people in charge didn't really think that the states would reject the feds and that it was all just posturing. Remember: obamacare was going to get more popular after thye passed it.

  6. main quote by phantomfive · · Score: 2
    Here's the quote from the article that I consider key:

    The biggest takeaway though, is that the way that the federal government bids out software is fundamentally broken. There are clearly companies in the industry who understand exactly the kind of problems that healthcare.gov needed to address. Intuit’s online TurboTax is much more complicated than the sign-up process for healthcare, and it works under heavy load. Amazon and Google both handle crushing loads gracefully as well. Why can’t the government draw on this kind of expertise when designing a site as critical to the public as healthcare.gov, rather than farming it out to the lowest bidder?

    Although it's not entirely right.....government contracts are more complicated than 'going to the lowest bidder.'

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:main quote by g01d4 · · Score: 2

      While the contracts may be more complicated you've got to wonder whether the right incentives are built in. Perhaps the gov't could have tied payment (or penalty) to certain post delivery metrics such as average time to sign up. What are the incentives that make e.g. Amazon, Google and Facebook software deliver a better user experience and how can they be incorporated into the contract?

    2. Re:main quote by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

      Intuit's online TurboTax is much more complicated ..

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it Intuit's TurboTax that scribbled data into some of the first 63 sectors of the user's hard drive as a primitive means of DRM? Yes, I did remember correctly. They're also the company that runs my credit union's web presence and have arbitrarily decided what characters a valid email address can contain -- in violation of the RFC. Certainly, let's have Intuit do the website for people who need health insurance and must buy it or face penalties.

    3. Re:main quote by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Intuit's online TurboTax is much more complicated than the sign-up process for healthcare, and it works under heavy load.

      To be fair, TurboTax didn't always work well under heavy load. It has evolved over the years so now it works just fine. Something to keep in mind.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    4. Re:main quote by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Government contracts typically come with a large list of requirements (on the order of 500 pages), almost entirely written by a committee with no idea what they're actually looking for. They'll require silly things like "must weigh over 1750 pounds" or "[a Windows XP system] must be accessible via VT-100 terminal", or my personal favorite, "all components [including electronics] must be manufactured in the United States or France".

      I'm told, though I haven't seen it myself, that the requirements aren't actually all enforced, but instead provide an escape mechanism the government can pull out when it wants to add features that weren't in the original plan. They'll ask for the new feature, and if the contractor refuses, they'll void the contract and claim it's because of all the missing required features. They do usually also append funding for the new features, but it's

      With so many requirements, of course a few key details like stress testing get missed. The political folks writing the specs don't always think about such trivialities. That means it's more difficult to get funding for such testing, and you certainly shouldn't expect government help.

      The problem with load testing is that it's as much an exercise in testing resources as in the application's efficiency. When it comes time to simulate a million users' load on the server, Amazon or Google could just spin up a few thousand virtual machines on their spare capacity, and simulate a few thousand users on each one. Smaller companies have to make do with what they have - probably a few old servers running a few hundred simulations. Combined with the forced feature creep and short-but-we-can-extend-it-and-blame-you deadlines, I'm always a little surprised when a government website runs at all.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    5. Re:main quote by DaHat · · Score: 1

      To be fair, TurboTax didn't always work well under heavy load. It has evolved over the years so now it works just fine. Something to keep in mind.

      So... because it took a while for TurboTax to reach the level of stability they have today... we should just accept the feds incompetence in this area?

      I would think what should be kept in mind is those who built & run healthcare.gov seemingly never bothered to reach out to companies & organizations which run massive data systems that can handle heavy load without falling over.

      Clearly no one from the HHS ever called up a systems admin or developer at the NSA and asked "How do we make sure we can to the cloud^H^H^H^H^Hworld?" ... Let alone someone at Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Rackspace, Twitter or any number of other companies who have massive online presences and do not fail as quickly & easily like healthcare.gov... doubly so with the 3 years of lead-time the feds had on this project.

    6. Re:main quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      While the contracts may be more complicated you've got to wonder whether the right incentives are built in. Perhaps the gov't could have tied payment (or penalty) to certain post delivery metrics such as average time to sign up. What are the incentives that make e.g. Amazon, Google and Facebook software deliver a better user experience and how can they be incorporated into the contract?

      Google, amazon and facebook could not withstand load when they started. Building systems that withstand load take time and testing. It also takes smart people being creative as they refine the design of complex distributed systems. The US Government can't pay people to do that, because everyone in charge of money is terrified that someone will accuse them of wasting taxpayer money.

              Every member of congress, and every manager in every non-military federal department, fears being accused of wasting taxpayer money. Congress knows that *any* action that could possibly be spun a waste will be used against them next time they run. Every federal manager knows congress is always looking to hold a hearing asking how they let waste happen.

              Suppose the contractor was paid extra if the site met a performance metric like "no downtime in the first week". This would not be cheap: You would have to have many engineers over-designing every part of the system, because they don't know the real load until they get real traffic.

              Suppose they meet the metric. The government pays them $$. The republicans cry WASTE!, and open hearings. The web site should work. Why does the company get extra money for doing what it was supposed to?

              You could try to avoid this by making the contract include a penalty for not meeting the "no downtime in the first week" rule. However, the base cost for the contract would have to be higher to build a system that could possibly meet the uptime requirement. Then the congressional inquiry will be to find out why a normal web site costs $, and the government paid $$$$.

    7. Re:main quote by afgam28 · · Score: 1

      The problem with load testing is that it's as much an exercise in testing resources as in the application's efficiency. When it comes time to simulate a million users' load on the server, Amazon or Google could just spin up a few thousand virtual machines on their spare capacity, and simulate a few thousand users on each one. Smaller companies have to make do with what they have - probably a few old servers running a few hundred simulations.

      Both Amazon and Google will let anyone use thier spare capacity for a reasonable fee, so big load spikes are no longer a valid excuse for web servers going down.

      Now, even if you've got something against putting all that healthcare data on the cloud, they could have at least stored the static content in S3 or some CDN. A quick glance at healthcare.gov shows that the front page HTML is about 60 KB but there is also about 200 KB of static images and another 200 KB of static JavaScript. That's a quick win right there and I'm surprised they didn't even bother to do that.

    8. Re:main quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, TurboTax didn't always work well under heavy load. It has evolved over the years so now it works just fine. Something to keep in mind.

      So... because it took a while for TurboTax to reach the level of stability they have today... we should just accept the feds incompetence in this area?

      Other organizations took years and thousands of engineer-years to become competent at this. They did it by building custom software that can handle the load. Why do you assume the federal government can do this instantly, when it took others a decade?

      I would think what should be kept in mind is those who built & run healthcare.gov seemingly never bothered to reach out to companies & organizations which run massive data systems that can handle heavy load without falling over.

      This is not a setting in a confg file. Every company that you site as able to do this writes custom software to make it work. You can't just call google and ask them how they managed to write their web server, load balancer, no-sql datastore, custom filesystem, etc, train an army of people to monitor and keep it running in a custom-made data center, and just do what they did.

      Clearly no one from the HHS ever called up a systems admin or developer at the NSA and asked "How do we make sure we can to the cloud^H^H^H^H^Hworld?"

      The NSA's problem is fundamentally different. Copying a stream of data is far easier than running custom logic against many requests.

      ... Let alone someone at Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Rackspace, Twitter or any number of other companies who have massive online presences and do not fail as quickly & easily like healthcare.gov... doubly so with the 3 years of lead-time the feds had on this project.

      You have no idea what is involved in building reliable distributed systems. There is a reason the list of companies who can do this is a short one, and that these companies pay a fortune to hire the smartest people they can find. I suspect you think this is easy because you have never built anything complex.

    9. Re:main quote by stenvar · · Score: 1

      Government can't draw on that expertise because the people making the choices have no big stake in the outcome of those choices.

      The people running Amazon, Google, and Intuit figure out how to keep their web sites running and who to hire/outsource to because their own money depends on it. The people running the US government may have the best of intentions, but ultimately, it's not their own money that they are spending.

      Note that Intuit does provide a service that could have been provided by the IRS: online tax returns. But for some reason, Obama chose to go with a heavy-handed, government run system instead.

    10. Re:main quote by stenvar · · Score: 2

      What are the incentives that make e.g. Amazon, Google and Facebook software deliver a better user experience

      Management knows they go out of business if they don't. But more importantly, it's not just a question of incentives, it's that the many companies that have tried to compete with Amazon, Google, and Facebook and provided a worse user experience have actually gone out of business. We're left with the better experiences because those are the only ones that survived.

      and how can they be incorporated into the contract?

      They can't, because the organization paying for the services (the US government) can't go out of business, has no competition, and can spend unlimited amounts of money.

    11. Re:main quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having quoted on and won exactly one government project, I can say that it was the most screwed up process that I have ever been involved in. The quote process went on for over 3 months. I ended up with 37 days of office work BEFORE the contract was assigned... All this for a project that took 8 days start to finish. Typically, I give my commercial clients a price to do something, they consider it for a few hours or days and I get a YES or NO. From May 21 to the end of August, I exchanged hundreds of email, phone calls, conference calls, etc. I had to sign up for DUNS, CCR and other government "numbers". Most of which you have to have another "number" just to sign up for the other "number".

      To make matters more aggravating, the bureaucrats sent their information requests on Friday afternoons with submittal deadlines of CoB Monday. Following yet another Friday evening demand for information in August, I pointedly refused to participate in further justification, recalculation, breakdowns or conference calls. It had been a bad day already and I was about 3 long island teas into my decompression routine. IIRC, my email said, "I anticipate NO further communications on this project until receiving a simple YES or NO" A few minutes later at about 7pm Washington DC time, I received not one but two calls begging me not to bail.

      As it turned out, all that wasted time was because my quote was too low... Two other bidders were in the $200-210k range and my quote was about $120k. If my quote had of been within a certain percentage of the other quotes, it would have been accepted with little interaction. Because I was familiar with the work site and the work needed, AND priced my bid at what it cost to do the work AND didn't pad it to cover the bureaucratic BS, I got to enjoy 3 months of constant haggling.

      Another thing that most people don't know about government work is that in most instances, THEY tell you what you have to pay your workers thru various prevailing wage laws (Davis-Bacon, Service Contract Act, etc). My already well paid crew made 3x their normal wage at the expense of the tax payers.

      AND I also found out that any email address submitted in the bidding process will immediately and continuously receive a deluge of SPAM (20+ per address some days) from all manner of "service providers" and other spammers. I created a series of email addresses for the DUNS, CCR, etc signup process and now 4 years later still receive several spams per day on those addresses.

    12. Re:main quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find the whole thing a very funny (tragic?) instance of the old newspaper expertise paradox: anytime you read something in the newspaper where you're an expert on the subject you think to yourself: these guys are idiots, they don't even understand the basics and the article's all wrong. Then you go on and read teh rest of the paper and accept it uncrtically.

      So, here we are with obamacare: the IT implementation is a disaster so far but we're all apparently still expecting the actual implemetnation of the law to be all roses and unicorns. Protip: the guys who built your shitty exchange interfaces are the same guys who wrote your "health care" law and are the same ones who will be responbile for seeing it implemented.

  7. Crazy requirement - usernames with numbers??? by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    From the list, one of the items casually mentions that usernames require numbers. What? I've never heard of a requirement like that from any other consumer system, ever.. they may suggest it (like YourName024 when a prior user has already used YourName) but do not require it.

    If they worry about uniqueness, just use email addresses as logins.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Crazy requirement - usernames with numbers??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Golly, I hope 420BlazeItFaggot is still available.

    2. Re:Crazy requirement - usernames with numbers??? by BoberFett · · Score: 2

      I've seen that requirement from banks, and a gym of all places.

    3. Re:Crazy requirement - usernames with numbers??? by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 2

      I think it does make sense. Considering there are going to be millions of people on this, there will be thousands of duplicate names. So rather than let the first person with a particular name, for example 'Tony Martin', take the username of 'tonymartin', make all of the Tony Martins have a number in their name.

      Later when the tenth Tony Martin who signed up calls for info about his account, and they ask for his user name, he can't just say it's 'tonymartin', and get someone else's information.* He could say he is 'tonymartin3', but he has no guarantee that that particular one was chosen by anyone. But without the number requirement, you know the first person of each unique name is going to request that as their username. This way, they are more likely to have their name followed by numbers representing various things such as their age, birth year, wife's measurements, favorite Star Trek movie, favorite BMW model, sports records, etc.

      *Yes, I'm sure they would require more verification than that before actually giving out personal information, but that doesn't mean it isn't going to happen anyway.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    4. Re:Crazy requirement - usernames with numbers??? by firex726 · · Score: 1

      Actually banks for me seem to have some of the worst online security.
      My bank for example, has a password limit of SIX characters; not minimum, but the MAXIMUM. Also no punctuation marks, only alphanumeric.

    5. Re:Crazy requirement - usernames with numbers??? by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      When was the last time you tried to open a new Gmail account?

  8. two things you can learn from it by stenvar · · Score: 1

    If you can get it, get a government contract to implement some huge IT system; you can have cost overruns up the wazoo, miss your deadlines, and create unusable interfaces; there will likely be few consequences, the customers can't run away from you, and the pockets of the government are infinitely deep to cover whatever you want.

    If you can't get in on such a boondoggle as a vendor, vote against any kind of politician who promises to solve problems with some huge, government-paid IT system; they rarely are cost-effective solutions or very usable.

  9. Your friend. by jamesl · · Score: 1

    "Load testing is your friend."

    In this case, any testing at all would have been friends to both developers and customers.

  10. What developers can learn: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    From what I've seen, the only thing that hasn't gone tits up was the UI.

    Poor execution will spoil even the best designs. Since this was contracted out to a hundred different lowest-bidders, I'm sure integration issues have compounded a laundry list of poor choices.

  11. web developers, not developers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    A lot of developers don't work on bunk ass ghetto web shit

  12. "Launched" is such an optimistic word... by cirby · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Launch" suggests that it actually, you know, worked.

    When a quarter million people hit a game company's servers and only half of them get to play, it's a disaster of unrivaled proportions.

    When millions of people hit billions of dollars in government investment and a few thousand of them actually get the site to work at all, it's a "learning experience."

    1. Re:"Launched" is such an optimistic word... by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      s/launched/lurched/g

      Or, if you prefer: a car analogy (You can either jump to 1:07, or watch the whole thing.)

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:"Launched" is such an optimistic word... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When millions of people hit billions of dollars in government investment and a few thousand of them actually get the site to work at all, it's a "learning experience."

      the article itself says the federal government has a broken system when awarding contracts, what makes the article funny is suggesting the feds contract out to the cheapest companies that are inexperienced in dealing with a heavily traffic sites.

      "" TurboTax which is far more complicated then healthcare.gov has no problem under heavy loads, Amazon, Google which receive crushing loads work without any hangups""

      Considering Amazon, Google get away with questionable practices from government regulations, these companies would probably do it for the same price and the site would work far better. You are going to still have issues but they would be minor and fixed within minutes or hours. healthcare.gov was thought of more as a poorly built video game from its UI, and UX, then an actual functioning site.

  13. Can't 0wn a powered-off server by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

    I thought the consensus from the last story about the shutdown was that the web sites were closed because a server that's turned off is less likely to get 0wn3d without anyone there to fix it.

    1. Re:Can't 0wn a powered-off server by Derek+Pomery · · Score: 1

      That would explain a closed website.
      It does nothing to explain websites that were left on and serving a "shutdown" page, in some cases, using a redirect such that the actual page loads before sending you to the block page.

      It is more directly comparable to Wikipedia's SOPA protest in function.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Monument_Syndrome has been brought up a few times.

      --
      -- perl -e'print pack"H*","6e656d6f406d38792e6f7267"' /. ate my old sig. Bastards.
    2. Re:Can't 0wn a powered-off server by cultiv8 · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that healthcare.gov is more secure than the federal sites that were shut down?

      --
      sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
    3. Re:Can't 0wn a powered-off server by ghotibrains · · Score: 1

      Undoing mis-mod... sorry!

  14. When you leave your ISP by tepples · · Score: 2

    If they worry about uniqueness, just use email addresses as logins.

    That's exploitable when you leave your ISP, someone else claims your username at that ISP, and your old ISP-provided e-mail address now points to another person.

    1. Re: When you leave your ISP by corychristison · · Score: 1

      Who the hell uses the email address provided by their ISP?

      Personally, I use paid e-mail hosting services for my family's e-mail needs, at a domain that I own.

  15. Health care from the same gov't as the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yep, let's turn over even more money and power to the same government that gives us the NSA, TSA, Patriot Act, and who knows what else that hasn't been leaked.

    Yeah, that governement is going to help us, right?

    1. Re:Health care from the same gov't as the NSA by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Since it's the same government that paves our roads, funds our schools, cleans our water, forecasts the weather, explores space, prosecutes our criminals, and extinguishes our fires, yes. We may as well add "heals the injured" and "cures the sick" to that as well.

      Ours is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. Sure, we've got problems - big ones - but we are not doomed. The Great Experiment continues.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    2. Re:Health care from the same gov't as the NSA by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      Since it's the same government that paves our roads, funds our schools, cleans our water, forecasts the weather, explores space, prosecutes our criminals, and extinguishes our fires, yes. We may as well add "heals the injured" and "cures the sick" to that as well.

      Note that most of "paves our roads", "cleans our water", "prosecutes our criminals", and "extinguishes our fires" is done by our State governments, NOT the Federal government.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    3. Re:Health care from the same gov't as the NSA by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      ...Aided significantly by federal money.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    4. Re:Health care from the same gov't as the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the road-paving is by private companies who are widely condemned for slipping schedules, corruption and bribery, and other such shenanigans.

      But let's just assume that's because they're dealing with the government, if it were all private companies, they wouldn't cheat each other!

  16. No worse/better than private business. by Above · · Score: 4, Insightful

    GTA V? Sim City? Final Fantasy? Battlefield?

    Turns out millions of users who start using something on the same day often don't follow the expected and tested for behavior.

    Anyone who launches a service like this should expect to spend the first week in triage mode, and the first month making adjustments. I'd like to say proper planning would mean that never occurs, but the only way to insure that would be to spend 10x what is really needed. People would hate the government even worse if they did that.

    This is not news, yet. It will be news in a month if it is still fubared.

    1. Re:No worse/better than private business. by alostpacket · · Score: 1

      but the only way to insure that would be

      ... to log on to website and buy insurance :)

      --
      PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
    2. Re:No worse/better than private business. by BoberFett · · Score: 1

      That's what scalable architectures and cloud services are designed for. Expand and contract as necessary.

  17. State Sites Also by jasnw · · Score: 1

    The Washington State's exchange website, for which the state paid $54 million to Delloite LLC, hasn't been a rollicking success either. I'm trying to wrap my head around why it costs $54 million to set up a pretty straight-forward website (costs evidently do not include hardware, just people/time/software). I believe that cost was over half what the state received from the feds to set up the exchange. Details here (such as they are).

    1. Re:State Sites Also by Cytotoxic · · Score: 2

      I'm going to guess that the lion's share of that money went to requirements gathering. A site like this which has to pull in data from dozens of different companies is going to have a lot of stakeholders. The consulting time for analysts and PM's to compile all of the user stories must have been immense. The actual development on the website itself doesn't look like it could have consumed more than a couple of million. That being said, my team developed about a dozen sites per year of comparable complexity (though not approaching that scale) on a budget of about 5 million, including all of the project management and requirements documentation on top of development, testing, administration and support.

      So yeah, I would have like to have had a shot at building the thing for $54 million. A little voice is whispering in my ear that I might have been taking home about half that amount for myself. According to the article you link, they are only getting $137 per hour for the lead technical architect. That seems pretty cheap for a consultant in that role on a project of this size. Heck, they bill out their account manager at $202 per hour. Oh, and they point out that they'll be getting all of their insurance plan info from eHealth.com So never mind about all that consulting time to gather requirements from all of the insurance companies on the exchange.

      Oh, and another point on the scale - with a population in Washington of just under 7 million and only 5% on individual plans and another 14% uninsured, the target user base is for under 1.4 million people, presumably many of whom are in family groups - so call it less than a million users total. That's big, but it isn't that big. They probably assumed peak usage at under 1% of the target audience and got it wrong by an order of magnitude because of the general curiosity.

    2. Re:State Sites Also by seyfarth · · Score: 1

      I think $54M is a bit expensive too. I can imagine that it might take some effort, but this would pay a team of 500 programmers for a year. I expect it could be done by a team of 5 to 10 in the same time. This sounds like the mythical $500 hammer to me.

      A better alternative would be to set up no exchanges and let the insurance companies provide the web sites. You would find some innovative people setting up exchanges on their own just like you now find exchanges for hotels and airlines. All the government needed to do was tell the insurance companies the new insurance laws and let it happen.

      --
      Ray Seyfarth, ray.seyfarth@gmail.com, http://rayseyfarth.blogspot.com
  18. planned? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NPR this morning says Obamacare was rolled out as planned. They planned this?

  19. Re:What can they learn? by sycodon · · Score: 0

    Not one god damned fucking thing.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  20. The basic problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was trusting the government to set it up. Health insurance should be sold like car, or auto, or any other insurance. Market based pricing should be the rule. Portable no matter where you live in the US.

    Asking the feds to create a market was sheer hubris. They are not capable of creating a budget, much less balancing it. Why would we believe they could accomplish something on this scale?

    1. Re:The basic problem by nomadic · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Why would we believe they could accomplish something on this scale?"

      Because they are the only ones who actually have successfully created healthcare systems on that scale, specifically medicare, medicaid, and the VA system.

  21. How about management? by Sarusa · · Score: 1

    When your boss says you're going to launch on October 3 no matter what, you get whatever you've got.

    I've occasionally (thankfully not often) had to turn out things I'm not proud of for customers who have no idea how to schedule and won't hear otherwise. Stuff like the front end/back end error handling is high up the chopping block.

    1. Re:How about management? by DaHat · · Score: 1

      I guess my boss & I are better at planning than 'your boss'... as we'll work together to scope out what sort of work is realistic in a given time frame... do that, and then re-evaluate... and do this multiple times during a dev/release cycle.

      By the end not everything we wanted may be in the box, but it works.

      Though not being able to get this whole mess right after 3 years another sign of their poor planning.

    2. Re:How about management? by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      Not every customer is the same. I've had quite a few over the years that didn't really do the "work together to scope out what sort of work is realistic in a given time frame" thing. Some people view IT as a personal plaything and requirements as a one-way-street. Heck, I had one big-shot pull a project that had been waiting for his final UAT for two weeks (after 3 weeks of requirements/development time) because "You might be able to finish this in another 3 months, but we need it right now." He didn't even have time to look at the ready-for-UAT version. He farmed the project out to a consulting firm that told him they could have it ready in 30 days. 2 years later they went live with the first beta. He was very proud of his success. After 2 years of horrendous scope-creep, the consultants were much less happy. The 2-man team that put together our version wasn't so happy with them - the version that finally went live still couldn't do everything that their original version could. It did have a really fancy flash-based "wizard" that collected all of the required information over the course of 15 separate pages (as opposed to the original single page web form). So there is that... You can guess how much the insurance agents and financial planners who were the target audience loved that.

  22. You meant, "What Project Managers can learn..." by quietwalker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've got a personal gripe about folks who think that 'developer' is code for 'guy who's expected to do everything in the project'. Outside of small projects, that's not how it should work in a healthy software development lifecycle.

    Developers architect and write code, and some of the topics covered in that short editorial are relevant; use of AJAX necessitates good error handling on the front end, and synchronization of client and server side validations. Sure, they may have a broad skillset besides and understand databases, and graphical design, and so on, but there's no guarantee they're the ones meant to provide those skills.

    For example, QA encompasses an incredibly large set of skills, familiarity with a wide range of products, and to be fair, seems to attract folks with a different life philosophy than those who identify themselves as developers. To talk about load testing - which itself is not a simple unit test to be added to a build - as a developer's responsibility, and ignore the vast, separate set of specialized knowledge and experience required to pull it off is ignorance. To include UX and UI design, and say these too are in the developers purview is equally misguided. (in fact, most developers are really, really bad at UI/UX, for some reason)

    Not that a developer couldn't do those things, or will automatically lack the knowledge or skills, but those are separate roles and separate disciplines.

    So, tell a project manager that they should make sure the QA team does load testing, and tell the project manager that the UI/UX team needs to provide descriptive error messages when validation fails, and so on. Very little of this is important to someone who's currently wearing the 'developer' hat.

    1. Re:You meant, "What Project Managers can learn..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I've got a personal gripe about folks who think that 'developer' is code for 'guy who's expected to do everything in the project'.

      Well I've got a personal gripe with you. Software is 'developed' and everyone involved in that process is in a sense a 'developer'. If you don't have any analysts (who are often quasi or former developers) or developers with skills outside checking in code, you're pretty fucked - someone has to understand the domain enough to sensibly interact with domain experts, and check that everything in the development and ultimate deployment of the software is sound.

      There are certainly different responsibilities, but also more overlap than not in the skillset and mindset of good architects, developers, and QAs. Good QAs are often those who can develop automated solutions for what they are doing, and quickly understand and diagnose faults rather than simply hitting STOP on a script. Projects on which they are very separate are probably failing either in quality or in the ability to implement capability.

      Are your successful multi-man projects either low-concept facades over vendor software or "one-line fix maintenance programs" dressed up as radical change, by any chance?

  23. very interesting situation by spiffmastercow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The devs are in a pretty interesting situation that you don't see too often.. They're tasked with developing an application that generally can anticipate a low load level, except for one (and only one) extreme peak load. Do you develop for the general case, or the (very important) exception? Remember that the difference between these two options would make a difference in the basic structure of the app. Do you use a traditional RDBMS (perfect for the low load case), or some sort of no-SQL system (possibly necessary for the peak load case)? Remember that you can't leverage any commercial cloud resources either -- these are government records, and there are laws saying they'll have to be housed on government computers.

    1. Re:very interesting situation by Wdomburg · · Score: 1

      Horse pucky. There is no reason to assume there would be one (and only one) peak load. If anything, one would expect annual spikes during the enrollment periods. And the enrollment projections have all seen mounting demand year over year. So this is an invented dichotomy to begin with.

      But even if one accepted that as a design precept, there is no need to simply fall down under peak. You make your UX components asynchronous and dump requests into a work queue. Return control to the user, give them a link to check on their status. Not only are these techniques well understood, they are neither difficult to implement nor particularly expensive. You can easily push a million messages PER MINUTE on a single box using free software like ActiveMQ.

      And the idea that performance is the determining factor between SQL and no-SQL betrays fatuous. There have been high performance SQL deployments far longer than the current crop of "no-SQL" databases. For transactional workloads with stable data models, you're likely to take a performance hit trying to shoe-horn into the flavor of the week data store.

      You also have to consider the repercussion of a malfunctioning system. Not only are you going to generate MORE traffic by being improperly sized for peak load (due to people reloading or making multiple visits), they also have manned phone banks to handle technical difficulties. Servers are cheap. People are not.

      Long story short, this has been an epic fail of the sort that would be inexcusable in the private sector. And unfortunately for the tax payer, it isn't a matter of being underfunded. The Department of Health and Human Services reportedly paid $55.7 million to Canadian (!) tech firm CGI Federal for this steaming pile, and may pay them upwards of $40 million more during the tenure of the contract.

    2. Re:very interesting situation by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      of the sort that would be inexcusable in the private sector.

      Except that things like this do indeed happen in the private sector, like e.g. the iOS 7 launch problems, the GTA V launch problems and need I go on?

      They did happen, the peak week 1 load dissipated, they were excused, the systems coped witht the normal load and it was basically excused.

      Yeah it may have been a fuck up and CGI may be crap but holding the government to a standard which simply doesn't exist and claiming the private sector is somehow better when it demonstrably is not is dinengenuous.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:very interesting situation by Wdomburg · · Score: 1

      Apple managed to roll out iOS 7 - which was in development for only a year - successfully to over 140 million devices in a single day. Rapidly address bug aside, it is nowhere near the scale of mess that the HCX rollouts have been.

      The launch of the online component of GTA V has certainly been rough, but we are again talking about a drastically different scale of problem. Online gaming is an extended, high bandwidth, latency sensitive distributed interaction and relies heavily on third party infrastructure (namely the Playstation Network and XBox Live). Going to a website to create a login or submit an application should be short, consume little bandwidth, be tolerant of far longer latencies, and involve only two-party transactions.

      We are also talking a drastically different scale of budget. The budget for GTA V is mind-boggling for video games (~$265 million for development and marketing) but it pales in comparison to the mountain of money being poured into the health care exchanges. Kaiser reported that $3.6 BILLION had been awarded in grants to the states to set up the exchanges, and that number doesn't include state funding. California alone spend $313 million on their exchange. It is difficult to know just how much has been spent on the federal exchange, since not all spending is called out explicitly, but the HHS has awarded well over $600 million to GCI alone (the $50-something million number was just one component).

      And in the end, the exchanges did not experience a particularly high level of traffic. Though not all states have released numbers, the ones we have are fairly modest. California, the most populous state in the union, reported a scant 514,000 unique visitors on Tuesday. That is NOTHING.

      I

    4. Re:very interesting situation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is plain release planning, don't create laws where devs are forced to do whole sale release.
      Release by region, start with a few smaller population states.
      Simple basics.

    5. Re:very interesting situation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      January 2013: Email to World: Preregister now at healthcare.gov and get the latest updates on your new health care options. (Take name and email)
      March 2013: Email to preregistered people: Ok we're ready to pre-qualify you for the health exchanges, login with your account to get started (Take all the really important information.)
      April 2013: Email to pre-qualification applicants: Congrats you're info taht we checked asychronously in the last month looks good, come back to pick your plan on 1 Oct OR hey we found a problem, please login to correct it.
      May 2013: Email to world: come sign up for pre-qualification. We'll get back to you PDQ to let you know if you're ok or need to fix something.
      Aug 30 2013: prequalification closes; now you'll have to sign up on opening day.
      1 Oct: IF prequalified user then goto fancy-pants real exchagne web site since we know exactly how many of you there are, else go get in line at a different less flashy web site and wait. We'll get back to you real soon now; we promise.

  24. Uh duh. by RJFerret · · Score: 2

    Odd, in my state it worked fine...no, wait a minute, it's only Oct. 4th, who in their right mind with technical savvy or experience would access such a new product in the first week of it's availability?

    I live in one of the most population dense states. My current health insurance is paid up through the end of the month. I won't be accessing the exchange for three weeks yet because everything in the article is obvious, but even if implemented within the time constraints to the best of their ability, will still probably have issues in the first few days.

    Duh.

    1. Re:Uh duh. by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      My current health insurance is paid up through the end of the month. I won't be accessing the exchange for three weeks yet ...

      You better send of a couple more payments to your current insurance company. ACA coverage through the exchanges doesn't start until 1 Jan 2014.

    2. Re:Uh duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the messiah has promised free health and uni-kittens (1/2 unicorn, 1/2 kitten and yes they still wantz to can haz the chezburger) to everyone starting on the first of October. his will be done no furhter payments required.

  25. I always wonder whyObama is having so much trouble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given that the IT portion of his re-election campaign went so well. Then I'm reminded Google and Facebook pretty much showed up and offered to do it for him. I wish they did that on this given that this is arguably more important that that.

  26. Stupid design by seyfarth · · Score: 3, Informative

    I didn't make it very deep into the web site. I was mainly interested in reviewing the rates for my county. What a surprise that there was a list with all the states's counties together! I was expecting to fill in my zip code possibly or enter the state and county to get a list of available policies. The resulting table was large enough to generate bandwidth problems. One stupid error in design could saturate their network! A good design would be easier on the users, the network and the servers. Now sometimes you have to trade server time and convenience for user time and convenience, but this was apparently not thought through. Surely someone in the government must realize that good design works better than bad design. If a web site is to be used by millions, it obviously needs a good design.

    --
    Ray Seyfarth, ray.seyfarth@gmail.com, http://rayseyfarth.blogspot.com
    1. Re:Stupid design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't make it very deep into the web site. I was mainly interested in reviewing the rates for my county. What a surprise that there was a list with all the states's counties together! I was expecting to fill in my zip code possibly or enter the state and county to get a list of available policies. The resulting table was large enough to generate bandwidth problems. One stupid error in design could saturate their network!

      I call shenanigans. What state has so many zip codes that text for each one is larger than a large image on any other site?

  27. architecture by worldthinker · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Did a little sleuthing and discovered they're using an F5 load balancer in front of it (at least my state exchange is). I'm rather shocked that they chose a classical client/server architecture and not say, a cloud architecture for this. This could have been written on Google's cloud or Amazon's or OpenStack even and probably done a much better job of handling this load.

    I would surmise that HIPPA requirements may have made cloud architecture problematic.

    1. Re:architecture by Above · · Score: 1

      I've seen several people say "the cloud is the answer". I have one simple counter example:

      Reddit. Any time they have a flash mob, and seemingly randomly almost every day they fail.

      The clould does some things better and some things worse, and scales in different ways than a more traditional layout. Both can work if properly implemented, and one or the other may be faster/cheaper/better depending on specific site requirements.

    2. Re:architecture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did a little sleuthing and discovered they're using an F5 load balancer in front of it (at least my state exchange is). I'm rather shocked that they chose a classical client/server architecture and not say, a cloud architecture for this. This could have been written on Google's cloud or Amazon's or OpenStack even and probably done a much better job of handling this load.

      I would surmise that HIPPA requirements may have made cloud architecture problematic.

      No kidding. Do you want your medical history on EC2 servers?

      Aside from the first week, the load on this system will not be high. Why go to the extra cost of building something complex, when something simple would do?

    3. Re:architecture by Chaos+Incarnate · · Score: 1

      It's going to be high for October and November annually, as people come back each fall to reprice their options and compare to their employers' offerings for the next year. Far more than a single week, and definitely worth investing in.

      --
      Benford's Corollary to Clarke's Law: "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
    4. Re:architecture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HIPPA in the cloud is very possible, Amazon is certified from above the kernel down to physical security. They would however most likely use GovCloud (at least for the backend).

  28. California's site is running well by mspohr · · Score: 1

    I checked out California's exchange web site and it's running fast. No problem registering or logging in and it's well designed to let you see your options.
    California is a state which is completely in control of the Democrats. We don't have the tea baggers who are trying to destroy government here. (I think there are a few but we ignore them and they are powerless.) Government (and most other things) work better here.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    1. Re:California's site is running well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This California must be a wonderful place. Hurry everyone pickup and move there before this magical place is ruined!

      "Government (and most other things) work better here."

      Are you trying to be funny?

  29. load balancing and queuing by shuz · · Score: 1

    It is worth noting that a raspberry pie computer could handle the work load of all the requests for healthcare.gov with correct load balancing and queuing. For PR you would need to set some expectation such as estimated wait time to get into the system, however your customer base would at least know that the system is working and that they just need to wait their turn due to the high demand. It is incorrect for most systems to be architected to assume everyone who accesses your system gets helped right away. The only exception to that would be an emergency response system where peoples well being is at stake. Look at many classic support call lines for major companies. Though they often have certain shortcuts based on how much you pay them, they have queuing systems that means regardless of how many millions of dollars a second you are losing, they may not be able to help you for x period of time.

    It is reasonable that healthcare.gov could not complete transactions with each person visiting immediately. It is not reasonable for a lack of a system advising users of either estimated wait time or at minimum notification that they have a place in line and that they will be helped at some point in the future with no further requirement of action on their part. Any developer or software/system architect creating a transactional system big or small would be wise to first code-in this mechanism. It will save them headaches, and maybe a weekend, at some point in the future.

    --
    There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
    1. Re:load balancing and queuing by shuz · · Score: 1

      Admittedly Raspberry Pi as an example is a bit extreme for this workload. But for fun, think about this. 3byte session token is ~16.7 million 4 billion if you go 4byte. The Pi has 512MB of memory. 16.7 million bytes is about 50MB. So lets say you load embedded linux, a small web server, and support tools hmm 32MB. Think you web developers out there could write a website in perl, c, or c++ with only 430 MB of memory? You couldn't get too crazy with images, but I think someone out there could do it.

      But what about session data? You can architect the system to server only one person at a time. Hopefully the profile on each person on the healthcare.gov website is not so large that you couldn't sneak it somewhere into your 430MB website.

      --
      There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
    2. Re:load balancing and queuing by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      16.7 million bytes is about 50MB.

      I vote we hire you as the government website author. You've proven an ability to inflate simple numbers by a factor of three, which is about a factor of six less than current contractors usually do.

      You can architect the system to server only one person at a time.

      So if there are just 1 million people who need to sign up for insurance and they take ten minutes each to review the material and decide, that means you'd have all of them "servered" in just 19 years. The CT website that had 100,000 visitors in the first day would have had all of them dealt with by sometime in 2015.

    3. Re:load balancing and queuing by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      I vote we hire you as the government website author. You've proven an ability to inflate simple numbers by a factor of three

      I think what he meant to say is "16.7 million [3-byte session-tokens] is about 50MB.".

      FWIW.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    4. Re:load balancing and queuing by shuz · · Score: 1

      Yes, in the example it is very likely that capacity would not keep up with demand. The point is, however, that systems can be built to give the allusion of capacity as well as giving the hope of being served. Ethics aside, these kinds of systems are often required to meet real business costs and provide the expected value. Services usually can't afford to provide a one to one provider to consumer be it electronic or human.

      --
      There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
  30. Have Patience by BenSchuarmer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If a web site is rushed into place on October 1st but there's no reason to sign up until January 1st, wait several weeks before you try use it.

    It's not slashdot. There's no advantage to getting FIRST POST!!!

    1. Re:Have Patience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not slashdot. There's no advantage to getting FIRST POST!!!

      The IRS isn't going to fine you if you don't sign up for CowboyNeal Care.

    2. Re:Have Patience by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      If a web site is rushed into place on October 1st but there's no reason to sign up until January 1st,

      Well, if you want to avoid a fine for not having insurance and you want to use the exchange, you need to have signed up by December 15. That would be a good reason not to wait until Jan 1.

    3. Re:Have Patience by Pretzalzz · · Score: 1

      You need to sign up by December 15th to get coverage January 1st. But your general point still stands.

    4. Re:Have Patience by DaHat · · Score: 1

      If a web site is rushed into place on October 1st but there's no reason to sign up until January 1st, wait several weeks before you try use it.

      Yet that's not what we hear when it comes to early voting.

      At the State of the Union this year, Desiline Victor, 102, of Miami was a guest of Michelle Obama in the balcony... and during his speech the President highlighted the fact that she waited in line for 3 hours to vote.

      What you didn't hear was that she showed up to vote on the first day of early voting in her area. Unlike key release dates, early voting is usually not expected to be swamped, but then voting booth capacity doesn't quickly scale, compute capacity sure does, so the inability of the architects/developers/etc of these websites not being able to crank a knob and handle the (very expected) increased load is inexcusable given the amount of pomp being given to the Oct 1 launch.

    5. Re:Have Patience by Above · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that people who signed up before March 31, a one time delayed deadline, did not have to pay the 2014 fine. The deadline for subsequent years would be December 15th.

      And the first year fine, $95 or 1% of income, whichever is larger.

    6. Re:Have Patience by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      I agree with everything in your post - except one thing. I voted in the same election in south Florida and the voting booth thing was infuriating. They could have scaled easily. They mostly voted in places like elementary schools and churches with scantron bubble ballots. Yet they only had the stupid mini-folding-table voting booths set up - limiting supply of voting stations. Here's this huge room with tables and seats for a couple hundred and you've gotta wait for one of 15 little stand-up booth thingies. Give me some scrap cardboard and a roll of duct tape and I could have built little 3-sided voting booth privacy shields for the lunchroom tables for double that number in under a half-hour. Which is exactly what the "additional assistance needed" booth looked like - only it costs $20 to buy the little plastic shield they put on the table. But nobody would have gotten the contract for a stack of $200 voting booth table thingies in that case.

      Of course the narrative is that the whole thing is a right-wing plot by those that somehow control the uniformly left/democrat elected officials down here. Truly a case of ascribing to malice that which can best be explained by incompetence. We voters down here are so smart that we have continued to elect the same supervisor that presided over the 2000 presidential election year after year. She's still there even though we make national news every election cycle for the problems with voting. Pogo was definitely on to something.

  31. Oregon in the same boat by linuxguy · · Score: 1

    Oregon paid millions to Oracle for their own solution. It was a disaster. It did not work for me as I kept getting errors. And Oregon actually opted for a simple solution where you could not actually sign up for a plan online. You only received information about available plans. 3 years and millions of dollars later, they could not make that work reliably. As a developer I am baffled.

    1. Re:Oregon in the same boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oracle won't be punished and they'll advertise their Oregon connection to get more contacts. Why waste money making something that works when you don't have to?

    2. Re:Oregon in the same boat by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      And Oregon actually opted for a simple solution where you could not actually sign up for a plan online.

      No, that's not what we opted for. The exchange is supposed to allow people to sign up, but since the site wasn't completed and couldn't provide information on the prices based on income, they disabled the ability to sign up and have made it "coming soon".

    3. Re:Oregon in the same boat by DaHat · · Score: 1

      In defense of Oracle... Oregon is a state where you cannot be trusted to fuel up your own vehicle... so why do you think they'd let you buy something as important as government mandated health insurance online?

    4. Re:Oregon in the same boat by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      What amazing stretches of the imagination people will go to to defend the State of Oregon against claims of incompetence when it shows that ACA exchanges weren't ready to be deployed yet. The fact is, we were supposed to be able to buy online but they couldn't manage to get the system ready even knowing about the need for several years. Three, IIRC.

    5. Re:Oregon in the same boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think your sarcasm detector is broken.

  32. Re:What can they learn? by slick7 · · Score: 1, Informative

    Not one god damned fucking thing.

    Not true, I learned that the portal is as useful as a politician. Considering the failure to balance the budget, reining in of these arrogant bastards who declared war on the American people. Over time will one understand the uselessness of these politicians and their insurance industry written healthcare policies. These CONgressMEN are as bankrupt as the nation they supposedly lead.

    --
    The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
  33. what i learned from the health exchange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is that the federal exchange is also funneling all data it collects to dhs (fbi/cia/etc) for reasons unspecified..... which is totally not needed for the exchange web site(s) to do their job.. any identity or eligibility verification that is needed can be done without giving a single bit of data to dhs or any of its agencies or departments.

  34. Why it wasn't easy to handle the number of users.. by JWSmythe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Everyone goes on the assumption that scale is "just make it bigger". I'd like to add some of my own notes on why this launch was doomed from the start.

    I used to work for an adult internet company who had massive traffic. We were serving millions of people daily before 2000. We would exceed 10M daily viewers about once a week. That fluctuated by rather consistent calendar influences, like the day of the week, part of the month, and part of the year. Sept 11, 2011 dropped 3/4 of our traffic for almost exactly 2 hours. So we knew how long huge news event would impact us.

    To handle 10M customers without a hiccup, we had to consider a lot of things. We didn't do much dynamic content. That's a killer. There were some elements that had to be dynamic, such as the voting/polling systems, message forums, etc. Otherwise, we had to try to keep the pages (html and images) as light as possible.

    The hardest abused system we had was user authentication and authorization. We only had a few million users that hit it, but there were thousands of hackers (and script kiddies) that wanted to try to get something for nothing. Come on, it was cheap porn, just pay for it. We could easily see over 10M auth requests per hour. In time, we fine tuned the system, and outright blocked abusive users at the firewall.

    The advantage we had was, when I was first in control over the IT work, we'd only see about 1M/day, so we had the luxury of growing it out. We'd watch for the problematic parts, and fix them. What works on your test bed where 10,000 users try it, even if they try hard, it doesn't mean you can put it on 100 servers and expect it to work for 1M users.

    healthcare.gov has some other severe disadvantages. From what I understand, they are hitting the SSA database. I don't know if that's an online query to the SSA, or if they're provided a static file to import periodically. I'd assume all kinds of government organizations have put their 2 cents in too. What are they checking identity against? Drivers licenses, SS cards, voter ID, green cards? That means they could be hitting 151+ more databases run by other organizations. Does DHS get the information? Is it fed back to them when a users accesses? Are the checked against law enforcement databases? Only those directly involved in the development will know. You can disregard anything in the privacy statements. You're not going to see a friendly note in the FAQ "If you're a wanted felon, information will be transmitted to the law enforcement organization looking for you." That kind of defeats the purpose.

    Depending on load testing never replicates what real users will do. Real users do weird things, just because they can. No amount of planning and testing will give you everything. There is always a lot of reactive work to be done. Shit, everyone reads the FAQ 14 times before logging in? They 20% of the people go through the login screens, back out to the 2nd page, and try again?

    I'm stuck on the same non-functional healthcare.gov site as everyone else is. I signed up. I never got an email confirmation or email address verification.

    My girlfriend got the verification and signed up again. I was able to present my user:pass and it did seem to say it was valid, but stayed there until I was thrown the overloaded message. Later, it said my user:pass was invalid. Is it really invalid?

    I tried to do the username and password recovery. Neither sent me anything, so I assumed my account wasn't made. When signing up again, it said my combination of email, username, and real name was not unique. Ok, so I'm at least partly there.

    I signed up again with a different username. This time I received the email verification, and clicking it did say I was confirmed to be a user. I still can't get in. It says my user:pass is wrong. Is there som

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  35. Re:What can they learn? by Albanach · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Considering the failure to balance the budget

    Why would you want to do this? If you had an income that fluctuated each year, would you not save in the good years so you could maintain a reasonable quality of lifestyle in the barren years? Or would you downsize your house and sell your car every other year as your income fluctuated.

    Balancing the budget is not the challenge. The real challenge is finding a government that can save when the going is good, and convincing the US electorate of the need for a rainy-day fund, rather than giving it all back and more in tax breaks.

  36. Republican Astroturfing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet this article is Republican astroturfing to make President Obama look bad.

    Lots of people hate him, some for a very very ugly reason - BECAUSE HE'S BLACK!

  37. Re:What can they learn? by felrom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not a challenge at all. Texas does it. We're required by our state constitution to have a balanced budget, and we only let our legislature meet for 150 days every other year. The result: once they are in session, they're working to hammer out the new budget and fix the real problems, instead of constantly being in session feeling the need to legislate something, messing things up, and wrecking the economy.

    It works so great that our economy in Texas attracts a constant stream of refuges fleeing the charred ruins of California's economy and its legislature that occasionally takes a two week break between sessions of wrecking the state.

  38. Amazon can't do it either. by students · · Score: 1

    The solution so far has been to put people into a queue, something that would get a site like Amazon laughed out of the marketplace. "I'm sorry, we're a little busy right now, try shopping later?!!"

    This was a strange comparison. Amazon often loads very slow for me, and pages fail to load completely on a regular basis.

    irs.gov used to be a good example of a fast site. It is not as fast as it used to be, but still about 3x faster than Amazon, probably due to a static design with few images.

  39. That means nothing by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    The Affordable Healthcare Act is not affected because it was fully funded. The budget Continuing Resolution is for things which are not already funded.

    And? Sites that require no funds to keep open because they are just sitting there 24x7 are being closed down. Privately funded areas around national parks, that are fully funded and privately owned, are being told they must shut down also.

    Perhaps YOU have not heard or read it, but the federal government is shutting down everything it can, even if it's already funded, or COSTS MONEY to make inaccessible.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:That means nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats because we have a Dick (and I do not mean Richard Nixon though he would have qualified under the same definition) in the Executive office whose staff is also saying "we don't care how long the shutdown lasts because we are winning."

  40. Can't get on GTA ONLINE nor OBAMACARE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF DUDE???
    GTA V:
    Cloud servers unavailable

    OBAMACARE:
    >>>
    Not Found

    The requested URL /serverdown.html was not found.

    !!!hOLy FUCKING SHIET!!!!

  41. Re:What can they learn? by kinthalas · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's not a challenge at all. Texas does it. We're required by our state constitution to have a balanced budget, and we only let our legislature meet for 150 days every other year. The result: once they are in session, they're working to hammer out the new budget and fix the real problems, instead of constantly being in session feeling the need to legislate something, messing things up, and wrecking the economy.

    Yeah. They never feel the need to legislate something, right? Only work to fix the real problems? They'd never decide that they needed a bit of extra time to legislate something just because they felt the need, right?

    I'll just leave this here for people who maybe aren't absolute morons:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendy_Davis_(politician)#2013_filibuster

  42. Why do I have to register just to get information? by coarticulation · · Score: 2
    I've been trying to get New Hampshire information (should be simple because we only have one provider in the exchange). Being self-employed I have mediocre individual insurance, but would like to see if ObamaCare* is better and compare costs. Hints in the local news indicate that costs are pretty good but their network has a limited set of hospitals and doctors, so I'd like to get information in order to figure out whether I even want to sign up or try to keep what I have.

    Tuesday I did the signup process, filled in all the information 3 times. Then I figured out that I could just hit the "back" button to go back to the security questions page and hit submit again. Finally got registered about 9PM, then got the validation email and clicked on that several times until it was finally accepted at 10:30PM.

    And I've been trying and failing to login ever since.

    So why should I have to go through all that just to get prices and find out which doctors are in their plan? On Ebay, Amazon, or just about any ecommerce site I can get the product description and price straight from a Google search. I only have to go through the registration/login hassle if I actually want to buy something. If they would just provide the plan information with a simple static html page I could get the information I want, stop hammering on their servers, decide what to do, and come back next month if I decide I want to buy.

    * Off-topic: If the program is even moderately successful, I suspect certain politicians will regret working so hard to ensure that Obama's name is forever attached to it.

  43. Errors by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 1

    Tonight I tried to see what the site had to offer. First it took me an hour+ and three tries with the "Live" chat to get real responses from a human. Then while verifying my account and trying to login I was given an error code and told to contact Experian by phone. Experian! Hilarious fail, except for wasting my time and being completely useless.

    --
    This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  44. Things aren't improving if you have a precondition by usacoder · · Score: 1

    "Now it doesn't mean I can't go see my current doctor, but my $4,500 out-of-pocket, is going to turn into a minimum of $26,000 out-of-pocket to see the doctor that I've been seeing the last seven years," he said. http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_northeast_valley/fountain_hills/fountain-hills-man-dropped-from-health-insurance-because-of-new-regulations

  45. Re:What can they learn? by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

    Exactly.

    If you did not think load testing was a good idea before this....

    well, you are pretty hopeless.

    --
    Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  46. Mandatory spending by tepples · · Score: 2

    I'm suggesting that the funding of healthcare.gov is through a separate bill and is thus not affected by the lack of a continuing resolution for fiscal 2014.

    1. Re:Mandatory spending by Derek+Pomery · · Score: 1

      Healthcare.gov is a bad example, but there are no shortage of sites simply displaying a notice that they won't be updated.
      Minor sites aren't even displaying that.

      --
      -- perl -e'print pack"H*","6e656d6f406d38792e6f7267"' /. ate my old sig. Bastards.
  47. just download the entire dataset.. gets you close by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if he's a tech person why not just download the entire pricing list. It's not an exact quote but it gets you pretty close

    https://anonfiles.com/file/3a6f09a6cf15aa0b341851afdff06111

  48. Re:What can they learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    All of which is offset by the huge number of bat-shit crazy, bible-thumping, teabagger Texans.

    Thanks anyway, I'll stick with California.

  49. Re:Why do I have to register just to get informati by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not to double post - but how far off is the general data you can just download vs actual quote? for example i pulled the following. I'm guess if you're a family you'd be around $878.20 for the plan below.

    NH BELKNAP Bronze Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Anthem Bronze Guided Access Plus-gjqa HMO Rating Area 1

    Premium Adult Individual Age 27 Premium Adult Individual Age 50* Premium Family Premium Single Parent Family Premium Couple* Premium Child
    $259.99 $443.07 $878.20 $596.63 $634.10 $157.53

  50. Re: What can they learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Wendy Davis was protesting a law that represents yet another act by the right wing to advance their agenda regarding abortion with specious regulations that serve no legitimate purpose. Those lies to support it aren't fooling everybody.

    Then again you started your own protest with an empty complaint about Wikipedia.

    Oh well, try this on for size...electoral turnout in Texas is terrible.

  51. Re:Why it wasn't easy to handle the number of user by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    The better approach would have been if they let people enroll online over the last few months. Traffic would have ramped up quickly, but it would have been less than 10M people on the first day. 10M is the number I read somewhere that they got on the first day of operation. Allowing a slower ramp-up, even if the authenticated area only showed some pretty stats on the number of carriers, doctors, registered users, would have been something for them to prepare themselves with. Now is too late to hope for a graceful start.

    Good strategy, nice thinking.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  52. And, one MORE time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The ACA was fully-funded outside of the normal order of things PRECISELY due to the arbitrariness of government and politics; When they jammed this through congress via the path of "budget reconcilliation" rather than the normal order (because Democrats wanted NO Republican participation in the crafting of, nor negotiations about, "Obamacare") they wired it into the budget system in a way that put it on autopilot as "mandatory" spending (like Medicare and Social Security... neither of which are in the Constitution) rather than leaving it in the "discretionary" spending category than needs continual re-authorizing (where the Military, which IS required by the Constitution, is... go figure...)

    1. Re:And, one MORE time... by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      The military isn't required by your constitution. Rather it's permitted, with an explicit requirement that its funding should need continual reauthorisation.

      The Congress shall have power ... to raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years

      The navy would seem to escape that restriction by virtue of being separately listed without it; presumably because a ship could be at sea for longer than that.

  53. OK, go back to your reliable sources... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Late night comics Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert, no doubt.

    We get it... you prefer your "news" doctored with audio and video completely edited and out-of-context to make only one side of the political spectrum look funny/stupid. Remember, these jokers are COMEDIANS and NOT journalists... they have no standards and no accountability beyond "how can I tweek this to make it funny?" and every time they are outed manipulating things they protest that they are just comedians. People who get ANY information from these guys are NO Information voters.

  54. As loing as you agree... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to cite:

    Huffington Post, Slate, Politico, or other leftists sites (many funded by old actual proud NAZI collaborator dirtbag Soros)

    ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, MSNBC .... all very left with "journalists" (rather than just pundits like at FOX) who either worked in Democrat administrations, Democrat congressional staffs, etc or with spouses/in-laws working currently in the Obama administration

    PBS, or NPR (government propaganda under control of Obama admin)

    NYT, WaPo, both in the tank for all things Democrat for DECADES

  55. Lesson Number One by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    Don't vote for tyrants.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    1. Re:Lesson Number One by Wild_dog! · · Score: 1

      Who is the tyrant?

  56. Re:What can they learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they don't have to worry about running public schools either.. just throw bibles at teachers and pray... so that saves a bit of time.

    and ya know, the reality is.. texas sucks... and there are far more FORMER texans living elsewhere now, than there are your so-called 'refugees' from other states currently residing in texas, to prove it.

  57. I'd Believe You... by glennrrr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...if I hadn't once lived in California and now live in a state with a functional state government. If you think Cali has anything but a horribly dysfunctional government with bottom of the barrel public schools, badly maintained roads, ridiculously high taxes (income, sales...) and unfair and arbitrary justice system, well, I think your standards are low.

  58. Re:What can they learn? by Ambiguous+Puzuma · · Score: 2

    Texas has the federal government to fall back on in case of, for example, natural disaster. The federal government doesn't have such a safety net; it must self-insure. On top of that, the federal government has to be prepared for contingencies such as war that do not really apply at the state level.

    The period of time, one year, is arbitrary. Requiring a balanced yearly federal budget would be like requiring a balanced personal budget every two week pay period, even though my biggest expenses occur monthly.

    What we really need is some way to balance the federal budget over a much longer period of time, a decade or two perhaps, spanning a full boom/bust cycle. This is, of course, much easier said than done.

  59. Bandwidth and electricity cost money by Chirs · · Score: 1

    A large scale website is not free to operate, you have to pay for the electricity to run the servers, and for the bandwidth used.

  60. Down Again by Wild_dog! · · Score: 1

    Just tried to get on again.... down again for maintenance.
    Have been trying around the clock since 13 minutes after it went into effect.
    I have called in 3 times and have inched along.
    Right now I am at the impasse of it can't confirm my identity for the last couple days and have been unable to upload my document to confirm it.
    Called and had my identity verified, but still my process says it can't verify my identity.

    1. Re:Down Again by esarjeant · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen this site work yet - every request is either "we have a lot of visitors" or "we are down". I figured by the end of the week things would get better but evidently that's not the case.

      Honestly, at this rate, they would be smart to put this off for a year. Iron out whatever glitches they've got and go live for required coverage starting in 2015.

      --

      Eric Sarjeant
      eric[@]sarjeant.com

  61. al-jazeera by Chirs · · Score: 1

    Or CBC/BBC for the Canadian and British take on american news. Within the US, maybe NBC, ABC, CBS?

  62. seriously? by Chirs · · Score: 1

    That's like saying that all the hold-up victim had to do was give up all their money and they could have avoided being hit during the mugging.

    1. Re:seriously? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Except it ignores the fact the CONSTITUTIONALLY appropriations bills originate in the House. The House has the privilege of writing them not the SENATE, NOT THE PRESIDENT. What both of those entities have is effectively a veto power, where appropriations are concerned. If they choose to veto the House's bill then it is their responsibility for appropriations no occurring.

      Anything else is just spin and DNC attempts to duck responsibility for the shutdown. They don't have the privilege of allocating monies; they can only accept or not accept what the House does. The House is executing its constitutionally designated function, the Senate and the President are trying to usurp power and force the House to give them the appropriations they want.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    2. Re:seriously? by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Article I Section 7 Clause 2 of the United States Constitution:

      "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."

      The Senate takes the House's bill, rejects it as is, amends it to strip out the Obamacare nonsense, and sends it back. Ball back in Boehner's court but in this case he chooses to do nothing. Didn't you learn this stuff in 7th grade civics class?

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    3. Re:seriously? by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Oh, wait. That's for raising revenue. Which the CR doesn't do. Still the House's fault.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
  63. Give them a break by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give them a break people. This healthcare system is here for the long haul, it doesn't matter how well it works in the first 10 months. What matters is how it works in the next 1000 years.

  64. I have an even better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called defund Obamacare or just shut it down entirely. That way deadbeats can just die or go bankrupt like they're supposed to.

  65. coveredca.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I don't know if TFA mentions this but:

    1. Get a domain that makes more sense. Redirect any domain that makes sense.

    2. Get those damned social networking buttons off the site. WTF? You're gonna tweet about your health coverage? Are you fucking insane? And a YouTube button? I hope substance abuse treatment is covered, because they're on crack.

  66. Re: What can they learn? by rs79 · · Score: 2

    Uh, yeah.

    Wendy was a voice of reason during that debacle; everybody else just glared at Texas and shook their heads.

    Texas: what a country.

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
  67. Re: What can they learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Texas can stop pushing fundamental religious ideas into schools, then it would be a good state to live in.
    Balancing a budget isn't hard, getting a group of idiots to agree on something is.

    The website is meant to help people get the required coverage, yet even with the computer minds of the NSA cracking our everyday lives, they cannot properly load test a website, test for bugs or even get it to function the way it should. Maybe the Government should work on getting things right.

  68. Throw the book out by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    From my experience the way you write bad code is to follow the "accepted" practices. Modern software engineering, and I use engineering very reluctantly, does not teach good coding practices. A rule which is never taught, at least I've never seen taught, is how to test your code properly. You need to do things like load testing, refresh testing, sequence testing and pattern testing. There is a reason why any good development company will have a full testing department because you really do need that level of attention to it.

    The other practice that is often overlooked is to hire programmers and not software engineers. A programmer is the guy / girl who can sit down and bang out a tasty script or program to do a task with out needing to pseudo code or flow chart it or use big bulky IDE's or do code reviews and etc, they literally program. Engineering software is like trying to engineer baking, you can put the all the theory you want behind it but in the end I just want an apple pie. You'll get better code 95% of the time if you don't hire the software engineer. I can't even tell you how many times I've had to ask the professional software engineer to rewrite his / her code because it sucked.

    Finally don't go live until you know the code is mostly flawless, you'll never get all the bugs out but you can get most of them out. When a website or program is released and it's full of bugs / issues, it just shows that the people behind it, management included, should not be involved with programming. If we went back to the old days, the 90's, then we'd see better code across the board. The only thing software engineer has done is brake good coding and turned it into a joke.

  69. They spent a billion dollars. On ADVERTISING. by cirby · · Score: 1

    No kidding. They have a billion dollar advertising budget to get people to sign up for Obamacare.

    They had three years to set up the online exchanges, but apparently didn't really start working the IT angle until this Spring...

    The load on the Obamacare servers, while large, is nothing compared to something like Amazon or even Travelocity.

    Note that all of the games you cite, while having problems, managed to actually work for most of their users.

    Final Fantasy XIV:ARR is a great example. While they had issues, the biggest problem is that they had about twice as many people sign up at the start as originally planned, and they still managed to have the game working for most folks. After restricting logins to keep the individual server loads down to a manageable level, they added server capacity and fixed a few bugs. A week after launch, the wait times dropped to a few minutes at most.

    The Obamacare sites are, quite frankly, terribly programmed. They should have a clean interface which asks just the right questions and drops them down to the servers. Instead they went JavaScript-happy, and each time you load the site, you get dozens of little independent scripts loading in your browser (11 CSS and 62 JavaScript files per PAGE) - a (probable) big part of the reason for the disaster is the 62x overload in JS loads.

    The system was originally supposed to hit the secure IRS and HHS databases, but they couldn't get that to work, so they dropped the IRS hookup - which means your reported income is on the honor system.

    There's also the recurring rumor that they might not be cleaning their database inputs quite thoroughly enough. That alone means I'm not going anywhere near this mess for at least a couple of months... or much, much later.

  70. health insurance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not trying to start an argument but wouldn't it be easier for people to sign up for Blue Cross Blue shield or Aetna? am I missing something?

  71. Don't offshore all the health exchange jobs . . . by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    . . . to Infosys (India). . . .

  72. Actual Problem (Hint: Not how you're paid) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can get past the "Fail Whale page", go to the registration page:
    https://www.healthcare.gov/marketplace/global/en_US/registration

    Firebug shows 62 separate Javascript files, weighing in at 2.1MB, (not to mention 14 CSS files). If you aren't minifying, combining, and gzipping your static files, you've already failed, no matter how you happen to get paid, hourly or salary. Although as a contractor, I firmly believe everyone in IT should be paid hourly.

    Holy HTTP requests, Batman!

  73. Re:Why it wasn't easy to handle the number of user by DeadlyBattleRobot · · Score: 1

    I signed up again with a different username. This time I received the email verification, and clicking it did say I was confirmed to be a user. I still can't get in. It says my user:pass is wrong. Is there something really wrong, or is it still totally broken? I don't know.

    Exactly this. The site may be overloaded, but when it does come up there are software bugs. I apparently have created an account but it won't let me log in. How do I know I created an account? When I can't log in I use the lost password affordance with my username, receive the lost password email, but the link back to the site throws an error page. I could not release a broken project to a customer in this state.

  74. Re:What can they learn? by Chaos+Incarnate · · Score: 1

    I can't imagine any period longer than 2 years working, unless we increase Congressional terms to match. Otherwise Party X who has control now will blow through the budget like there's no tomorrow, and leave Party Y holding the bag (and quite possibly unable to spend any money) during whatever the last two years of the cycle are.

    --
    Benford's Corollary to Clarke's Law: "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
  75. Re:Why do I have to register just to get informati by DeadlyBattleRobot · · Score: 1

    So why should I have to go through all that just to get prices and find out which doctors are in their plan? On Ebay, Amazon, or just about any ecommerce site I can get the product description and price straight from a Google search. I only have to go through the registration/login hassle if I actually want to buy something. If they would just provide the plan information with a simple static html page I could get the information I want, stop hammering on their servers, decide what to do, and come back next month if I decide I want to buy.

    This is exactly what I have been telling my friends. The heathcare.gov site is ridiculous. You should be able to select your state, and go immediately to a static page with a table the plans sorted by age, etc., with a phone number to call to sign up. No registration nonsense. I've heard there are about 160 plans from 3 companies in my state. Who knows when I will get to see them? I still can't log into the site, even though I made it through the registration process.

  76. Re:Why it wasn't easy to handle the number of user by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

    I used to work for an adult internet company who had massive traffic. We were serving millions of people daily before 2000.

    Was it first served first come?

  77. And not just an afterthought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My company is starting on a large web-based product. We haven't even written any code, and we're already looking at load-testing services and strategies.

  78. Re:Why it wasn't easy to handle the number of user by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

    Here's a little something I posted to others.. I only figured it out 2 nights ago. I wrote it for a more general audience. I hope it helps you...

    ---------------------

    I found a problem with the healthcare.gov site. If you aren't able to log in at all, read the following... Share as you wish.

    Ignore what the instructions say. I'm showing 3 tries. The third try worked. Obviously, I'm not showing the real values I used, just values following the same pattern.

    For the username, use mixed uppercase, lowercase, and numbers.
    No more than 9 characters.

    1st try: johnsmith_99
    2nd try: johnsmith_9
    3rd try: JohnSmith99

    For the password, use mixed uppercase, lowercase, and numbers.
    No more than 8 characters.

    1st try: A0b1c2D3e4^hIJklmnoP
    2nd try: A0b1c2D3e4hIJklmnoP
    3rd try: AbCd3fG4

    After creating the 1st and 2nd account, for the first couple days I couldn't get any automated messages when I tried the username or password retrieval.

    Tonight I got responses for the password retrieval, which said the accounts didn't exist. I tried to sign up again with the 1st and 2nd username, and it said the username already existed. (Hint!)

    I don't know what the real limit is on the username or password length. I used 8 characters, because it's "strong enough", and deals with the ancient crypt() problem. Always use random strings. Never use real words in any language or "31337" character substitution! (zero for O, 1 for i, 3 for e, 7 for t, 8 for B, etc). If I ever find out you use p@$$w0rd, I will personally hunt you down and slap you in the head. ... and this is what happens when a sysadmin/programmer tries to figure out how someone elses system is horribly broken.

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  79. Monuments, Parks, and Security by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    What these fail to mention is that there are usually security guards and security camera monitors protecting the monuments and parks from 9/11-like attacks and other riff-raff. It's not just a matter of opening gates.

  80. Re:What can they learn? by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

    Always time the launch of your web site when everyone is looking in the other direction?

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  81. Re:What can they learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, yes, it's horrible! Please don't come! Everything bad you've ever heard is true: the ten gallon hats, six shooters, tumbleweeds, all of it.

    Please stay far, far away in your safe coastal liberal enclaves.

  82. I'm just a Bill by uslurper · · Score: 1

    Nonsense!
    Congress does not get to soley decide how money is spent. They just start the process.
    Any bill needs to be agreed upon by the congresss, senate, and president.
    Didn't you watch schoolhouse rock?

    Otherwise, whats to stop them from not paying for anything they dont like? Revoking the salaries for judges that dont agree with them? Or not paying for fuel for Air Force 1?

    Congress needs to pass a budget that will pass senate and not get veto'd. Knowingly passing a budget that will not complete is purely political. Its normal and accepted for most things, but for the budget it is downright evil.

    --
    oldhack: "Security is a waste of money until shit hits the fan. 5 minutes later, it becomes waste of money again. "
  83. Re: What can they learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which is kind of like what happens now, except the bag continues to be passed forward with no check at all.

  84. Most websites get to grow over time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Few websites get smashed with traffic on day one. A private company couldn't deal with this any better for their own website than whoever the government contracted it out to.

    It is like enduring 5 years of growing pains in one day.

  85. Re: What can they learn? by Lothsahn · · Score: 1

    Wait, according to wikipedia[1]:
    "the bill would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, require abortion clinics to meet the same standards that hospital-style surgical centers do, and mandate that a doctor who performs abortions have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital"

    This is a right wing agenda bill? These seem like VERY reasonable medical protections for women, and a fetus' viability starts around 23 weeks...

    [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendy_Davis_(politician)#2013_filibuster

    --
    -=Lothsahn=-