Sebelius - should she resign?

[boomerang]

If this guy is correct, the website is years away from being functional. Read the article to learn how progressive "leadership" gets things done. This is light years beyond a clusterfuck. Republicans could campaign on the waste and utter incompetence associated with this website alone and never run out of talking points. Now we'll have to throw good money after bad to get 'er all fixed up.

Obama is probably being shielded from how big a disaster this is and is clueless that the House has been actually throwing him a lifeline by asking for a one year delay.

Obamacare computer code riddled with typos, Latin filler text, desperate programmer comments and disastrous architecture

The real story on the catastrophic IT disaster known as Healthcare.gov is only now beginning to be recognized by the nation. As a person with a strong IT background running large R&D projects, I was among the very first to claim that Healthcare.gov is not just broken, it's DOA because of critical design failures.

It's not merely a "glitch." It's way beyond a SNAFU. This is the defining failure moment of the delusional thinking of democrats and their fantasyland government-centralized economy.

Remember that the website is available in no less than 150 languages? Yup, 150 including Gujarati. You'll have to read the article to learn more on that. But there's this...

Even though I have only seen the public Javascript code and not the server-side processing code, the Javascript itself is truly disastrous -- on an epic scale.

For example, the Javascript file loaded for each user transfers all error messages, form field messages and front-end error messages from the server to the user's browser repeatedly for each cultural language supported by the system.

In other words, the entire set of error messages is hard-coded into the Javascript for English, then again for German, then again for French, Spanish, and so on, all the way through Gujarati and who knows how many other unheard-of languages.

I don't even know how to begin to tell you how disastrously idiotic such a design is. It practically guarantees a critical server crash under any kind of real user load. No programmer with an IQ above 100 would design js code in such a manner. This code was designed and written by utterly incompetent people who have built into the system exactly the kind of architecture that will make it fail if anyone tries to use it.

When HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says this code is "functioning," she's actually painting a giant "dunce" sign on her forehead. This code is so far from functioning that all the government programmers in the world couldn't make it work smoothly by January 1.

The problems are so huge that the press can't ignore it any longer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/u...igns-of-trouble-at-health-portal.html?hp&_r=1&

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...f3ce2e-31ec-11e3-9c68-1cf643210300_story.html

Canadian officials fired IT firm behind troubled Obamacare website

The ObamaCare Website – The Biggest Tech Gaggle Ever?

$634 Million ObamaCare Website Company was Fired by Canada

 

[PokerGuy]

No, she should not resign. She should be fired for complete and total incompetence. Then again, by that metric, we'd have to fire most of those in government, starting all the way at the very top.

 

[IEC]

No, she should not resign. She should be fired for complete and total incompetence. Then again, by that metric, we'd have to fire most of those in government, starting all the way at the very top.

QFT

 

[Bowfinger]

My pissy attitude is the result of you taking issue with 99.999% of my participation here. Posts, replies, doesn't matter, you don't like it. My "attitude" was developed as a reaction to your attitude. But that's OK - truly. Whatever your thoughts are regarding my participation are your thoughts and I'm OK with that. In other words, if you don't like me that's fine.

So, having said that, my reactions to your post in this instance were not warranted. I should have replied exactly as you stated. I should just have asked your thoughts on her resigning.

Fair enough. Note that I don't like or dislike you personally; I don't know you. I often dislike or disagree with your posts, and I'm generally pretty direct about stating why. I'm not singling you out, however, since I respond similarly to others' post I disagree with, and I reply to only a tiny fraction of yours.

The irony (which I sense you may now recognize in retrospect) was that I wasn't trying to avoid your other question or to be inflammatory in my initial response. Though I disagree with a key part of your premise, I thought the topic was interesting and a basis for productive discussion.

But if you're unhappy with my "poor communications" you're going to have to find a way to deal with that. We don't think alike and I know I'm not going to make any changes. As far as "productive discussion" that's something you've taken issue with regarding me since - forever. I've stated many times that I post here for my amusement. I foresee nothing being changed by any discussions on an internet forum that will affect policy in this nation or anywhere in the world. This is a virtual world, not a real one and we are not "players". We cant change anything. I post when I feel a desire to express my thoughts. I don't post in an attempt to sway opinions.

As a wrap up, I have been trying to not respond to or engage in conversation with the few individuals with which I butt heads here. I recognize that I need to do a better job on that and I vow to try harder.

Again, I'm not singling you out re. "productive discussion". It's one of my most common complaints here, and not just people on the right. Indeed, IMO it's the biggest problem with P&N as a whole. It's why I wish it was practical to use content-based moderation.

Also, my definition of "productive discussion" isn't changing the world, or even necessarily changing others' minds. I'm interested in learning about the many facets of each issue, and understanding the reasoning behind others' points of view. The frustration comes when it becomes obvious that many opinions are based on ignorance and often outright lies, especially when those people then lack the intellectual honesty to reconsider their views once presented with accurate information. That's when the discussion often becomes more "spirited". In other words, I like people having their own opinions but find it frustrating when some insist on having their own facts.

Cheers. Thanks for your reply.

 

[dank69]

My pissy attitude is the result of you taking issue with 99.999% of my participation here. Posts, replies, doesn't matter, you don't like it. My "attitude" was developed as a reaction to your attitude. But that's OK - truly. Whatever your thoughts are regarding my participation are your thoughts and I'm OK with that. In other words, if you don't like me that's fine.

So, having said that, my reactions to your post in this instance were not warranted. I should have replied exactly as you stated. I should just have asked your thoughts on her resigning.

But if you're unhappy with my "poor communications" you're going to have to find a way to deal with that. We don't think alike and I know I'm not going to make any changes. As far as "productive discussion" that's something you've taken issue with regarding me since - forever. I've stated many times that I post here for my amusement. I foresee nothing being changed by any discussions on an internet forum that will affect policy in this nation or anywhere in the world. This is a virtual world, not a real one and we are not "players". We cant change anything. I post when I feel a desire to express my thoughts. I don't post in an attempt to sway opinions.

As a wrap up, I have been trying to not respond to or engage in conversation with the few individuals with which I butt heads here. I recognize that I need to do a better job on that and I vow to try harder.

It's not really our fault you create threads and posts supported by terrible data and logic.

 

[Bowfinger]

If this guy is correct, the website is years away from being functional. Read the article to learn how progressive "leadership" gets things done. This is light years beyond a clusterfuck. Republicans could campaign on the waste and utter incompetence associated with this website alone and never run out of talking points. ...

The guy is a hack. Either he doesn't really understand what he's talking about, or he's a partisan who is knowingly spouting disinformation to support his bias.

For example, he calls out typos and spelling errors in text strings as if they are material to the readiness of the system. That's pure nonsense, and any experienced developer knows it. Developers aren't professional typists, and their spelling skills are often weak ... just like most people raised in an era of spellcheckers and auto-correct. This is doubly true for developers for whom English is a second language (and there a typically a lot of them on projects like this). Yes, the code itself must be spelled correctly to work, but comments and text strings do not.

He also makes much drama about all the different languages embedded in JS, suggesting this makes the files so huge that they bring the host servers to their knees. More nonsense. While I agree 150 different languages seems over the top, what he fails to recognize (or perhaps to admit) is they're just text. A single JPEG image is larger than dozens of pages of text. If he's used the Internet lately, he might notice that most web pages load plenty of images without killing their servers. Bloated JavaScript might bog the client down, but the servers really don't care.

Finally, he outright lies when he claims we still cannot confirm that even one person has successfully enrolled. Insurers have publicly stated they're getting enrollments. The problem is those successful enrollments are only a fraction of those who are trying to enroll.

The problems are so huge that the press can't ignore it any longer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/u...igns-of-trouble-at-health-portal.html?hp&_r=1&

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...f3ce2e-31ec-11e3-9c68-1cf643210300_story.html

The press was ignoring it? I don't know what press you're talking about, but reports of these problems are everywhere. They've been lead stories and front page stories pretty much everywhere, as far as I can tell.

That said, thanks for those two good links. I hadn't seen either yet. Both offer more of the behind-the-scenes insight I'm interested in.

 

[PokerGuy]

healthcare.gov, offering you a glimpse of your future healthcare today. Overpriced incompetence, on a massive scale.

 

[Matt1970]

No, we don't need a year delay to get a system ready for tens of millions of new customers (Individual Mandate) but we need a year delay to get a system ready for a few hundred thousand customers (Business Mandate).

 

[Bowfinger]

No, we don't need a year delay to get a system ready for tens of millions of new customers (Individual Mandate) but we need a year delay to get a system ready for a few hundred thousand customers (Business Mandate).

I realize it's a popular talking point that resonates well with the clueless, but it's nonsense. If you knew anything at all about business IT you'd know that is an apples to alligators comparison.

 

[Matt1970]

I realize it's a popular talking point that resonates well with the clueless, but it's nonsense. If you knew anything at all about business IT you'd know that is an apples to alligators comparison.

Oh I agree. A system that will manage a few hundred K vs a system that will handle 10's of millions is an apples to alligators comparison.

 

[PokerGuy]

No, we don't need a year delay to get a system ready for tens of millions of new customers (Individual Mandate) but we need a year delay to get a system ready for a few hundred thousand customers (Business Mandate).

Well duh. Those millions of new customers haven't bribed....errr.....contributed heavily to the democrat pacs, no delay for them. Those who paid get delay, those who don't get to deal with the website right now.

 

[Bowfinger]

Oh I agree. A system that will manage a few hundred K vs a system that will handle 10's of millions is an apples to alligators comparison.

They're not at all the same kind of system (or systems, in the case of the business mandate). But that's fine, I won't belabor the point with you. You're too intellectually deficient to understand such differences and too arrogant to acknowledge your errors. Wallow in your ignorance proudly, like a squealing pig in its own feces.

 

[Matt1970]

They're not at all the same kind of system (or systems, in the case of the business mandate). But that's fine, I won't belabor the point with you. You're too intellectually deficient to understand such differences and too arrogant to acknowledge your errors. Wallow in your ignorance proudly, like a squealing pig in its own feces.

Nobody said they were the same kind of systems but they have had 3 years to put this together and test it. Pokerguy's explanation seems to make a hell of a lot more sense than yours, but then again I didn't drink the Kool Aid.

 

[Bowfinger]

Nobody said they were the same kind of systems

Yes, which is why your comparison was apples to alligators. The software to implement the business mandate is more complex and mostly has to be done by the businesses or their third-party software suppliers.

but they have had 3 years to put this together and test it.

Something like that, but they did a poor job, no doubt for a combination of reasons. That's why the consumer roll out was such a train wreck. Nobody's claiming otherwise, as far as I know.

Pokerguy's explanation seems to make a hell of a lot more sense than yours, but then again I didn't drink the Kool Aid.

No, you seem to take it in suppository form. Or maybe an IV drip? It's absorbed more quickly in either case.

 

[Matt1970]

No IV drip, I shoot it all at once. I see twinkles......

 

[Fern]

Yes, which is why your comparison was apples to alligators. The software to implement the business mandate is more complex and mostly has to be done by the businesses or their third-party software suppliers.
-snip-

Honest question: Why would software for the business side be more complex?

Seems to me the individual side might be more complex. Instead of calculating for groups (employer group plan) individuals must be each separately calculated plus you have the additional layer of info etc for calculating the govt subsidy.

Fern

 

[sactoking]

No, we don't need a year delay to get a system ready for tens of millions of new customers (Individual Mandate) but we need a year delay to get a system ready for a few hundred thousand customers (Business Mandate).

Actually, if you want to go down that road, the empployer mandate delay was justified. There will be several tens of millions of lives in the individual market in 2014. There will be a couple hundred million lives in the employer/group market in 2014. The employer mandate was delayed because the computer systems couldn't handle the employer reporting. So, from that perspective, while the employer mandate only affected a few hundred thousand employers it affected a few hundred million lives.

 

[Agent11]

I thought it was pretty ridiculous when Obama said that the response was greater than they could have anticipated... Shouldn't they have anticipated most everyone using the site?

 

[sactoking]

Honest question: Why would software for the business side be more complex?

Seems to me the individual side might be more complex. Instead of calculating for groups (employer group plan) individuals must be each separately calculated plus you have the additional layer of info etc for calculating the govt subsidy.

Fern

The group side is fairly complex as well. For the small groups, each memeber is individually rated, so there is just as much demographic information going into the system. Then, for the large groups and self-insureds, they have to report on the level of coverage, cost, and affordability (cost vs income) of each employee. My understanding is that's where the problem manifested itself and why the employer mandate was delayed: the system could not reasonably handle the information reporting from the large groups and self-insured employers (something like 95% of all employed lives in the US) so there was absolutely no way to ensure the employer mandate was being complied with.

In terms of the individual mandate, while the eligibility is more complex with the demographic and income eligibility information, verifying compliance with the mandate is much more simple: either you have insurance or you don't (in a very big nutshell).