Posted on 10/23/2013 11:55:54 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Bingo. The very last thing Obama wants is for his team to be giving depositions in a lawsuit detailing every decision made along the course of this thing.
It was written by a white guy. Enough said.
Realize that the info that is put into this HHS application is cross-referenced against data at the Census Bureau, the IRS, Department of Agriculture, Justice Dept, Treasury Dept, etc. And these systems do not communicate with each other very well. A lot of these old government legacy systems are old but still functioning. They are still robust enough to handle the jobs they have, but hooking up something new to it doesn’t work well at all.
Tom, I believe your informed observation of the thing will be borne out in time.
Though I'm not a programmer or systems designer, I follow your logic because it's simple and elegant. Therein lies truth, which is the thing that will eventually bring this monster to its knees.
We'll soon find out if liberals enjoy paying more from their own pockets to provide 'free' health care to their neighbors. Any bets? LOL
I suspect some execs will be called before a congressional committee and be lobbed softball questions. They will reply the questions are to complex and they will have to check with their technical people.
Obvious outcome. The new guys want nothing to do with the previous effort.
But not to be solved by low-bid, politically-correct, government-quality contractors. :-)
At the very least, they could have ramped up the hardware to handle the expected load. Infrastructure is what I do for a living...there's still a little witchcraft involved, but it's largely just figuring a base user load and from there it's math. Not having the equipment to handle an onrush like this - in today's era of virtualization - is absolutely inexcusable, again IMHO.
Solvable by Obamacare? How?
Obamacare was supposed to "solve" a problem with reality. That problem was that health insurance that took all comers - even those with pre-existing conditions - was very very expensive.
Obamacare promised to solve that problem and - at the same time - save money for the average enrollee.
This cannot happen. At least, not without massive government subsidies. No government on Earth, including that of the USA, can afford those subsidies permanently.
Because the basic idea within Obamacare is flawed, illogical, and unsustainable, any website that tries to deliver that solution to the public will not work, can never work, and is doomed to failure.
I'm not sure if I'm proud I can predict it, or horrified I can predict it.
It's a 'you' problem, as ESPN Radio's Colin Cowherd is wont to say. In short, we told you so.
"We simply cannot make this work. It's impossible. I think we're going to have to go 'Single Payer'. That is the only remedy."
Wait for it..
Obamacare won't work. It can't, based on simple economic theory. You're absolutely correct.
I was talking about the website. While your general premise - no website can be built to sell a product this flawed - is correct, I think that the initial rollout could have been structured - and TESTED - so that there were fewer errors, the amount of infrastructure behind the site was correct, and so forth. Lipstick on a pig, to be sure, but the average low-info voter wouldn't know the difference.
Frankly, I'm not displeased that the website fell on its face right out of the gate. If it was working correctly, when presented with a littany of options, low-info voters might pick one, shrug, and walk away. They might complain about it later, or not.
But now with all of the issues, low-info voters look at the problems and say "This is a piece of junk. What the #$@##@@ are they trying to sell me, here???"
Just my $0.02. YMMV.
That is a Classic.
They will put up something with cool graphics, that doesn’t really do anything, and brag about fixing the problem.
Throwing more hardware at it helps in many instances if it is just a processing bottleneck. But what if the code is bad and causes processes to run amok under load? Another thing is data integrity of user data in the various databases. Lets say there is bad data entered at a credit reporting agency that the system uses to validate a new user. The user would never no he is entering inaccurate info. One of the credit reporting agencies has my address screwed up enough, that they wont let me use there web page to check my credit report. They say I have to mail them info showing my correct address.
Websites function to increase the transparency of the organizations that put them up. To the extent that they accomplish this, people find them useful and enjoyable to use.
Of course, by making yourself more transparent, you also make any shortcomings in your business model more easily discoverable, because anybody anywhere can go on your website, poke around, take screen shots, cross-correlate information that's on your website with information that is on other websites, etc., etc.
That's not even mentioning the very big problem of security and hacking.
The Obamacare model can not work as advertised. If it could, it would have been adopted by the private sector long ago.
I believe that one of the reasons - maybe a big reason - why the contractors who did the website had such a hard time delivering it on time and making it work was because of constant demands - from various parts of the Obamacare bureaucracy in Washington - to make it difficult or impossible for the inherent contradictions and untruths of Obamacare to be discovered by people from their computers, by simply logging on to the site.
In effect, the contractors were being asked to use a tool for increasing transparency in a way that worked against transparency. That's a contradiction that neither the contractor, nor the program manager(s) to whom the contractor reported could solve.
The language is poorly chosen. The author used “blowing up” to promote a picture of one of those buildings collapsing as a result of an explosion. It will be written off the balance sheet.
What will really ultimately happen is that a new home page will be developed saying in the words of Emily Litella “Never Mind”.
What will actually happen to the failed web site is that it will be written off. That is, a $200 billion asset (?) will simply be trashed and they hope forgotten.
Understand the concept....... like a totaled car, the asset will simply be written off the books
-PJ
Refresh my memory: 50 tested lines of code per man/week ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.