Over a million developers have joined DZone.
{{announcement.body}}
{{announcement.title}}

6 Notes To Consider on the Technical Difficulties with Healthcare.gov

DZone's Guide to

6 Notes To Consider on the Technical Difficulties with Healthcare.gov

· Web Dev Zone
Free Resource

Discover how to focus on operators for Reactive Programming and how they are essential to react to data in your application.  Brought to you in partnership with Wakanda

healthcare-aca

I’m not involved. I am not saying I’m for/against ACA. That said, a few things I’ve gleaned from a few of the technical views on the internet that weren’t from a higher profile source such as the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/21/us/insurance-site-seen-needing-weeks-to-fix.html

First, when management says “a few weeks”, what that really means is a few months. Yes, months.

Second, because it’s so big with many of the parts not under the purview of the contractor, they can’t rewrite it. That means, it’ll take 2 times or more longer.

Third, bringing on additional contractors/people will not help fix the problem. There was a book written in the 1970′s called the Mythical Man Month that debunked the claim that adding more programmers will make things get done faster. It causes the opposite. See Slate’s coverage here: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/10/21/obamacare_and_the_mythical_man_month.html

Fourth, launching a site before it’s fully tested is fine and encouraged. Software, currently, has no fool proof way to detect for all problems. There are certainly languages and programming techniques some mathematicians can use, but that’s not the tools the private sector uses to build web sites.

Fifth, even if fixed, it’s clear the parties they’re responsible for connecting to for customer data are a huge component and huge part of the problem such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Since they are not under the direct control of CGI Federal, the contractor originally responsible to build healthcare.gov, there is only so much you can do to compensate for someone else’ incompetence & lack of communication. Meaning, holding CGI solely responsible unfortunately is not an option. It’d be easy to blame CGI for the failings, but that’s not how software, and our bloated government, work.

Sixth, 8 out of 10 software projects are failures, and 9 out of 10 are perceived as failures. Software is hard. We do it not because it’s a lottery, but because when it works it makes a huge difference despite the huge assurance we’ll fail.

Things will slowly improve. There will continue to be glitches, some of which the press may even talk about a year from now. Jan 1st deadline is unrealistic.

… and for those who are curious about what just 6 million lines of code can do vs. 500 million, check it: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/10/the-navys-newest-warship-is-powered-by-linux/

Learn how divergent branches can appear in your repository and how to better understand why they are called “branches".  Brought to you in partnership with Wakanda

Topics:

Published at DZone with permission of Jesse Warden, DZone MVB. See the original article here.

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

The best of DZone straight to your inbox.

SEE AN EXAMPLE
Please provide a valid email address.

Thanks for subscribing!

Awesome! Check your inbox to verify your email so you can start receiving the latest in tech news and resources.
Subscribe

{{ parent.title || parent.header.title}}

{{ parent.tldr }}

{{ parent.urlSource.name }}