Posted on 11/16/2013 7:11:55 AM PST by Lazamataz
Per the Obamacare Web Disaster: Many of you know I develop websites just like this for a living. It's what I do.
I am here to tell you, given three years that they were given, if I had the following team: One artistic Design person, One skilled DBA, one skilled Security guy, one Web/Data integration specialist, three skilled developers (2 on .NET and one on jQuery), one Business Analyst who knew the legislation, and one Policies and Procedures person (for the ATO and C&A certifications and documentation) and me as Architect, I could have had this thing deployable and humming along on Oct 1.
Yes, the scope would be larger because of the multiformat data exchanges with other Federal agencies..... but that is why I assigned one guy for Web/Data Integration. He'd have three years, and I would ALSO take this strategic move:
I would launch a web service, secured, where they could both retrieve and deliver data. THEY would need to meet MY interface requirements. Thusly I would leverage their people, costing us less. My Web/Data Integration specialist would then only have the task of retrieving the data from the secure web service repository, and shuffle it where it needs to go.
I could have done with with 10 good people. See, I've DONE systems of this complexity before. My estimate of man-years is accurate. We'd have 30 man-years, plenty of labor necessary to accomplish this.
10 people. Let me re-emphasize that.
10 people.
That's it.
I would not have charged 300 million, I would have charged 12 million -- maybe even 15!.... and we would have all gotten EXTREMELY wealthy on it.
This does not include hardware and the people to set that up. Figure 20 million for that.
Because this Obamacare website is such an ongoing disaster, I am compelled to creativity.
I HEREBY COIN THE TERM:
"FUSTERCLICK" (c)
It used to be for LESS THAN the cost of a poorly designed, insecure, inefficient website, we could go to Mars and back, employ a lot more people, conduct a lot of neat scientific experiments and have tons of spare change.
That’s true, $15 million is a hell of a lot less than $680 million and you could have got rich in the process as well. $680 million, that just ticks me off to no end when I hear that. I had an IRS bill I had to pay off that took me YEARS and these subhuman pieces of pig vomit in Congress are blowing money like that on utter crap. A friend of mine who works for Puralator says this same Canadian company that did this Obamacare website also did Puralators as well and completely effed it up. It just puzzles me why with all the talent here in the US are these companies going to foreigners? Like Donald Trump was saying, they could have made some deals and got Microsoft or Google to do it for free. Just think how much healthcare $680 million could have bought for some people. There are people right now going absolutely bankrupt because their kid has cancer and these pukes are spending $680 million on a website
If you give me the right nine women, I can get you a baby in one month.
I still say we should have given Amazon a copy of the regs and said you start selling in 3 years. Go for it.
Besides, you haven't heard from me in TOO LONG! :)
The Official Lazamataz Sometimes-Funny, Sometimes-Disturbing Ping List
238 Satisfied Customers!™
Cute bunny but he need a pancake on his head!!!
Of course you are... ;-)
That's probably considered Agile SCRUM right there.
Of course, I'd have to hit it.
Nice to hear from you Laz...
THe weak spot is finding someone who actually knows what’s int this monstrosity of a law.
Glad you checked in, brother.
Well, they passed it. So now we can read it.
So instead of “Charlie Foxtrot,” we can use “Foxtrot Charlie.”
Yes, that works. Good job!
I think the above meme is the one that needs to be hammered, instead of going for the head fakes about rollouts and one-year reprieves etc.
The end goal is govt coercion of “bad comrades” by the threat of withholding needed meds, procedures and operations.
“Be a good comrade....or else.”
You are presuming that the executive sponsor of the overall project desired that the roll-out & go-live would be a complete success.
There is the saying that “The Customer Is Always Right”, but as you probably know all too well, sometimes you have to slap the crack-pipe out of the customer’s hands and either restore sanity to the requirements -OR- consider firing the customer.
I’ve been on some projects that were stunning in how poorly spec’d and scoped they were, but nothing as astronomically heinous as the HealthCare.gov effort. I can only imagine just how pervasive, contrary & conflicting the requirements were and just how dictatorially demanding and technically clueless the stake-holders were.
So then it becomes an ethical question for the vendor: You readily recognize that this is going to be a “FusterClick” on a *MASSIVE* scale and add to that that you will be knowingly and willingly wasting tax-payer funds at an near incomprehensible burn-rate.
Do you take the gig knowing that the conflicting requirements and business processes will doom it to ultimately fail spectacularly -OR- do you decline the gig and save your reputation? It may be their FUBAR’d requirements and biz-processes, but you know that your implementation team will be left holding the bag and the blame.
Unless you are a sales-slut or executive who easily becomes blinded by the dollar signs, I’d have to decline it as soon as it’s impending doom was identified and it became apparent that the sponsors refused to address and resolve the discrepancies.
Love to be a fly on the wall though!!
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.