Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Obamacare Website Fixes Could Take Two Weeks Or Two Months

samzenpus posted 1 year,8 days | from the one-of-these-days dept.

Bug 382

An anonymous reader writes "It looks like nobody is quite sure how long it will take to fix the health insurance marketplace website. '"One person familiar with the system's development said that the project was now roughly 70 percent of the way toward operating properly, but that predictions varied on when the remaining 30 percent would be done," the Times reported yesterday. "'I've heard as little as two weeks or as much as a couple of months,' that person said. Others warned that the fixes themselves were creating new problems, and said that the full extent of the problems might not be known because so many consumers had been stymied at the first step in the application process."'"

cancel ×

382 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Still faster / easier to apply than it used to be (3, Interesting)

Barlo_Mung_42 (411228) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116819)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ql9RVy6FWkg

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116915)

It just goes to show: It doesn't always pay to contract everything out to the private sector...

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (3, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117003)

It just goes to show: It doesn't always pay to contract everything out to the private sector...

Nor does it pay to code it till it's designed, and debug it till it's tested.

If the state of the website is any indication ... (3, Informative)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117349)

I do not feel so great for Obamacare at all.

I mean, the code itself ( as referred to the following link: https://www.healthcare.gov/marketplace/global/en_US/registration.js [healthcare.gov] ) is hopelessly broken.

The code looks more like a primary school coding project than a government project.

Or does this signify the quality of (or rather, the lack thereof) : care Obama wants give the US citizens ?

Re:If the state of the website is any indication . (4, Funny)

liquidpele (663430) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117401)

lol, yea, I heard Obama coded it all himself right after pissing on an American flag and giving the finger to some vets.

Re:If the state of the website is any indication . (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117461)

lol, yea, I heard Obama coded it all himself right after pissing on an American flag and giving the finger to some vets.

I heard that people were being required to buy something from a private corporation even if they didn't want to.

Re:If the state of the website is any indication . (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117505)

I heard that people were being required to buy something from a private corporation even if they didn't want to.

Where'd you hear that? I heard that people who don't wish to buy health insurance will be assessed a tax that will partially offset some of the emergency room fees and such that uninsured people incur on the health system.

Re: If the state of the website is any indication (2)

glennrrr (592457) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117667)

I'm pretty sure that 2.5% of my income will more than cover any emergency room visits I'll be making in the long run. Especially as they'll be paid out of my credit card.

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (5, Informative)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117163)

"It just goes to show: It doesn't always pay to contract everything out to the private sector..."

This website is not even what I would call "private sector". A couple of days ago I looked at some javascript from the registration page. You can look at it yourself HERE [healthcare.gov] , direct from healthcare.gov.

This javascript is hopelessly broken. Even simple string values are completely messed up. I just checked it again, straight from the website, and even the most basic (literally first day javascript student level) mistakes have not been changed!

This is a complete mess. 70% my smooth, shapely, lily-white ass. It ain't even close to working.

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117169)

Clarification: when I said it's not even "private sector", I mean it's not representative of private sector coding. It looks closer to a middle-school student's "do what I mean, not what I say" style of almost-coding.

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (4, Insightful)

clockwise_music (594832) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117299)

There is some gold in this file. Some highlights:

resources['ffe.ee.myAccount.TEST'] = 'Apples to Apples';

Seems like someone was trying to work out how to add resources. Looks like they also wanted to test out the quoting:

resources['ffe.ee.myAccount.quoteTest'] = '“Apes.”';

Hmm looks like you can't update your name at the moment. I guess you could call XXX-XXXX to do it: resources['ffe.ee.myAccount.profile.updateName'] = 'To change your name you must call 1-800-XXX-XXXX';

Hey I wonder what happens when you try to login too many times incorrectly? Apparently nothing:

showAlertText :function() { //TODO: add functionality to show alert text after too many tries at log in },

I wonder who "Pod 6" is?

//$('#signUpButton').hide(); pod 6 doesn't want this hidden

And then my personal favourite, which is written twice in the code:

// make sure we don;t try to do this before the saml has been posted

Why is there a semicolon in the "don't" word? It is a typo or couldn't they figure out how to escape a single quote character in whatever is generating their JS? (This line is repeated twice) I'm guessing it was just a rushed developer who was running out of time.

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (2, Informative)

mikelieman (35628) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117443)

Why didn't your state setup their own exchange like my own, New York? It worked great. The fed site redirected me right to new york's site.

Easy Peasy.

I guess if the state you live in just couldn't get the job done themselves, and NEEDS TO RELY ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DO IT FOR THEM, well, beggers can't be choosers, can they?

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116947)

But there's still no guarantee your application will go anywhere. You can be disqualified and shunted into Medicaid.

This was an abortion from the start. If single payer is what you want, they should have just opened Medicare to everyone. Free if you're destitute, you pay otherwise.

Of course, we still don't have enough doctors and medical professionals, and that situation will only get worse. So many under BarryCare, Medicare, whatever will still have trouble getting treatment without supplemental insurance anyway.

Throwing more money at the problem by desperate Democrats will only cause the bills to increase. The cure will still be just as harsh.

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (1)

tepples (727027) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117045)

If single payer is what you want, they should have just opened Medicare to everyone.

That would have taken more of a Democratic majority than continued to exist once Ted Kennedy passed away.

Of course, we still don't have enough doctors and medical professionals

How much of that is due to AMA lobbying?

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (0)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117077)

So the laws of supply and demand don't hold here?

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117633)

Basically, no they don't, because the market has been 'fixed' by licensing issues brought about by AMA lobbying over decades.

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (1)

Burning1 (204959) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117519)

I can't speak to Doctors, but right now the education industry has pumped out way more nurses than we can employ. If the ACA forces hospitals to expand, the nursing jobs will fill quickly.

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (1)

Burning1 (204959) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117527)

As a side note, the lack of insurance has a tendency of making medical problems worse. Patients won't tend to pay out of pocket for preventative medicine, instead waiting until a medical issue requires emergency care. The ACA can certainly help correct this issue.

Apt platitude: An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Re:Still faster / easier to apply than it used to (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117019)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ql9RVy6FWkg

In the video link, the applicant was unable to get insurance in both cases.

What difference does it make if it's faster to get the SAME RESULT?

you really want to know what obamacare is? (0, Troll)

FudRucker (866063) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116823)

it is simply a extortion racket disguised as a health care program

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116865)

Yes, niggers will get in easier because it is designed for niggers. It is designed to rob money from the whites and give it to the niggers and wetbacks.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117453)

So what did you expect? You get a nigger to run your country and it ends up just like every other country run by niggers. Surprise, surprise! Guess who's gonna be the next South Africa?

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116883)

I love how all the Slashbots object to NSA collecting information on them, but they can't wait to get a "civilized" health care system like Europe or Canada. They will be falling all over themselves to hand over all their medical records to the gov't.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (3, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116923)

What makes you think Slashbots have any love for the Obamacare site?

it's supposed to be a "market" but it's nothing of the sort. You can't actually see any products or prices. You are only allowed to "apply" and for that you need "register" and then to provide identifying information that Experian approves of.

If this were any industry website, my response would be "fuck that".

Even if the stupid thing were working as intended it would still be broken. It's broken by design.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (4, Informative)

mspohr (589790) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117173)

I don't know about the Federal site since I'm in California but the California site is great. You just have to enter your zip code (no registration) and it will show you all the plans in your area along with the costs and all of the details of deductibles, etc.
Easy.
The plans are cheaper than my current insurance so that's good too.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (0)

mikelieman (35628) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117459)

It's not supposed to be a market. It's supposed to just be a front-end to redirect you to your state's market, IF your state wasn't too lazy, negligent or incompetent to setup their own sites. If you didn't want to take what you get after dropping the ball, maybe your state should have taken care of you correctly?

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (5, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116927)

For some reason people want health care that won't bankrupt them. They look at what citizens of other industrialized nations get and want the same.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (1)

hsmith (818216) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116945)

Obamacare is a false choice of an answer. Our healthcare system needs a systematic change, but to say Obamacare is the answer is wrong. It isn't really a big surprise that the most regulated industry, outside of nuclear has the most out of control costs.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116963)

What a great idea. Deregulate health care! That will sure solve
That will sure solve the problem.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (1)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116969)

It isn't really a big surprise that the most regulated industry, outside of nuclear has the most out of control costs.

What? That's crazy talk. We all know that the health insurance industry is free to do whatever they want with no repercussions. There is no regulation of it at all.

(I hope the sarcasm is obvious there.)

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (-1, Troll)

MightyMartian (840721) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116983)

In a perfect libertarian world, an insurance company should be free to kick you off if you're severely ill, and you're free you're free to crawl into a hole and die. But do it quietly so as to not disturb the Koch Brothers.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (1, Informative)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117055)

Libertarians don't believe in legal contracts?

Interesting. Tell me more, please.

Also, tell me what you do with the 20% of your post-tax income you give to charity. Do you give it to only one national group, or do you split it among several local groups?

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (4, Insightful)

whoever57 (658626) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117107)

Libertarians don't believe in legal contracts?

What, you think that insurance companies will actually offer contracts that don't allow them to terminate the contract (or doesn't allow them to raise the rates to the affected individuals so that they cannot afford to continue the insurance) if the individual's medical costs get too high, unless the law forces them to do so? You must live in some other country.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (1)

misexistentialist (1537887) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117377)

No one is going to buy the policy unless it is worth the premium. Of course if they want to pay $10,000/month they can find something better. The people forced to buy government insurance, on the other hand have zero guarantee of getting anything: "Your appointment with a veterinary school dropout is scheduled 15 months from now, citizen."

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (2)

LynnwoodRooster (966895) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117321)

In a perfect libertarian world, an insurance company offering you a policy would have to abide by the terms of the policy, and if the terms prohibited them from kicking you off, then they couldn't do so.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117427)

And if no policy can be found with such terms, you would die.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (2)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117611)

You are under the false impression that an insurance company treats disease and cures medical conditions.

It's the doctors and hospitals that won't treat people unless they are paid that let people die.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (1)

Burning1 (204959) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117615)

The libertarian ideal assumes that the nautral state of business is competition, when in reality the natural state of business is collusion and consolidation. In a libertarian paradise, one of two things happens:

1. The major insurance companies collude, offering customers no choice in plans. All plans offered have loopholes where the company can easily dump the sick. Customers are given no choice, and insurance companies more or less write a death clause* into their policy,

2. The major insurance companies consolidate to the point where you only have one or two options, neither offering any real choice or competitive reason to chose one over the other. You accept whatever plan is offered.

In either case, start-ups are quickly squelched.

You more or less see this in the drug trade. In mexico, the drug market is more or less deregulated, since the government has no power to control the cartels. While the major cartels do squabble, they prefer not to compete against each other directly, as doing so tends to weaken both, allowing a 3rd cartel to grab for power. Regardless, upstart operations are quickly squashed.

You may argue that this situation is the result of government regulation. I'd agree, but point out that the only thing government regulation has done is artificially raised the value of the commodity. A commodity that is 'necessary' and sufficiently rare or expensive will tend towards the same result if left unregulated (see various oil and communication companies. See also diamonds, where the DeBeers conglomerate created the same artificial scarcity as seen in the drug trade.)

* Prior to the ACA, insurance companies did not have 'death panels' but they did have a 'death clause' in the form of a $3.5 million dollar lifetime cap on coverage. If you hit this cap, your 'pre-existing' condition would disqualify you from purchasing insurance from a competitive provider, and unless you were extremely rich, you clearly would not be able to insure yourself. At this point, you would be stabilized and sent home by the hospital as soon as your medical costs had left your family destitute.

"False choice of an answer" (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117119)

What the fuck does that mean?

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117183)

The other side of the problem is the insurance companies. Most conservative do not want to admit that large coorporation DO NOT want open fair market competition. They want a monopoly, and a large goverment beuracracy to keep things complicated enought that individuals do not know what they are buying. Make the bariers to entry so prohibative that only the established players can play.

The insurance system is the EXACT opposite of a free market. In a free market INDIVIDUALS would be buying their own health care and paying for the doctors and hospitals out of their own pocket. This would quickly eliminate the $40 aspirin. The system we have now pays the insurance companies who have a legal obligation to the stock holders to maximize profits ( minimize payments). A hospital system that will ramp up charges as much as the insurance companies are willing to pay, and a restricted supply of doctors (AMA). It would be much better to have 10000 mediocre doctors that could be seen right away than a few awesome specialists who are great but you are likely to die in the E.R. waiting to be seen by them.

The best system would be to outlaw medical insurance. Health care would quickly come to an equilibrium so that people could afford it.. The next best system would be to have a single party system, or something akin to regulated phone and utility system. The worst possible system would be to have an unholy alliance of governement and a profit driven private industry.

I do not understand why conservative do not understand that big business is the exact opposite of free market. Probably because they are brainwashed by the Rush Limbaugh, and Fox, who are in turn financed by big business (go figure).

30 or 40 years ago, our health care system worked? Then more and more employers started offering health insurance. This skewed the system, so that people were no longer in charge of the cost of health care. It is exactly the same with college. Used to be your could have a part time job and put yourself through shool. Now with goverment subsidies (college loans) and soldiers returning with GI bill, there is no incentive for colleges to cater to those who are unwilling to take out a 50K + morgage on their future.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117499)

Obamacare is a false choice of an answer. Our healthcare system needs a systematic change, but to say Obamacare is the answer is wrong. It isn't really a big surprise that the most regulated industry, outside of nuclear has the most out of control costs.

Obama didn't want "Obamacare" either. I think the ideal would have been a single-payer system.

But the Republicans didn't want that, so as a compromise the US got the ACA. (And even now many Republicans aren't happy.)

Welcome to politics.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (4, Insightful)

BradMajors (995624) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116951)

True, but Obamacare does nothing to reduce the cost of health care.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117101)

For me it will wildly increase my healthcare costs. Looking back over the last decade, there would have never been a single year that I would have passed the deductible on the cheapest plans available. Plus the total cost of all of my healthcare needs (that I paid 100% out of pocket) for that decade total to less than one year of premiums. For a plan, that if I had it at the time, would not have paid a cent.

Just fucking wonderful. I guess my only hope is that I develop serious and expensive medical problems soon.

Re: you really want to know what obamacare is? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117151)

Odds are good that you will, before you die...

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117141)

True, but Obamacare does nothing to reduce the cost of health care.

This is at the very least arguable

No one ever counts the cost to treat the uninsured (once they are at a bad enough point of going to emergency room). That part will be reduced.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117481)

It has been counted. That part is irrelevent. Almost all costs are treating chronic conditions in the elderly who do have healthcare already.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (1)

funwithBSD (245349) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117645)

It's not healthcare, it is healthcare INSURANCE.

You have not found, or paid for, the the healthcare yet.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116955)

Annnnnnnd........Apparently you're a bit too dense to see the difference between the situations.

Giving medical records to private contractors ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116961)

I love how all the Slashbots object to NSA collecting information on them, but they can't wait to get a "civilized" health care system like Europe or Canada. They will be falling all over themselves to hand over all their medical records to the gov't.

No.
Its handing over personal and medical information to corporations who have the contracts for implementing the web sites, and
its handing over personal and medical information to the private volunteers and contractors who will be going out evangelizing and helping individuals fill out the forms to sign up.

Re:Giving medical records to private contractors . (0)

ClickOnThis (137803) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117159)

I love how all the Slashbots object to NSA collecting information on them, but they can't wait to get a "civilized" health care system like Europe or Canada. They will be falling all over themselves to hand over all their medical records to the gov't.

No.

Its handing over personal and medical information to corporations who have the contracts for implementing the web sites, and

its handing over personal and medical information to the private volunteers and contractors who will be going out evangelizing and helping individuals fill out the forms to sign up.

This.

It's breathtaking how the right-wing fringe (funded in no small way by the Koch brothers) is losing its mind over this issue. They think (or try to persuade others) that Uncle Sam is crawling up your butt with a microscope. [Note: the NSA is another topic.] The fact is that the ACA (aka Obamacare) sets up exchanges for people to purchase insurance from private companies. The government is not providing the coverage -- the private sector is.

And yet there's a hue and cry about "government-run healthcare." Guess what: it already exists, it's called the VA. Single-payer? That already exists too, it's called Medicare (probably Medicaid too.)

Honestly, the ACA is not a drastic step compared to what exists already in the collection of US medical-care options. The main point is that medical-insurance coverage is now open to tens of millions of people who would not be able to purchase it otherwise.

Re:Giving medical records to private contractors . (1)

funwithBSD (245349) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117653)

This left wing screed brought you by George Soros.

We don't have a problem with that, because it is not the Koch Brothers.

Re: you really want to know what obamacare is? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117041)

I preform all of my medical self-exams alone in my locked up house. I then keep all records of those exams totally secret from everyone. It's a great system. You try it.

Re:you really want to know what obamacare is? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117489)

The person who modded this "troll" will die of pancreatic
cancer this year.

Could take two week? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116827)

samzenpus - slashdots finest 'editor'.

Could Take Two Week Or Two Months? (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116833)

Honestly, I think the editors purposely put typos in their headlines to increase the number of comments on an article. Can't resisit........

Puh leeze (0)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116835)

Obamacare Website Fixes Could Take Two Week Or Two Months

Well was the committee studying this properly constituted? It can't possibly have been formed, yet, much less completed its study and issued preliminary results.

Re:Puh leeze (2)

philip.paradis (2580427) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116939)

I doubt there's any real committee yet, at least not one comprised of people with sufficient project management and technical expertise to competently analyze this train wreck. Everyone working in an upper management role on this project should be terminated, although that's a difficult proposition when some of those personnel are likely the people needed to assist competent personnel with beginning to understand how badly this system is built. So they should be terminated immediately following resolution of most of the outstanding problems.

Everyone should keep in mind that we're still paying for this with our taxes, and the massive cost overruns on this project (USD $634 million and counting for shit that doesn't work) aren't likely to slow down any time soon.

This is going to make the 90% rule interesting (5, Insightful)

garyebickford (222422) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116839)

"The first 90% of the work takes the first 90% of the time; the last 10% of the work takes the second 90% of the time".

Re:This is going to make the 90% rule interesting (1)

garyebickford (222422) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116851)

Replying to myself, "and the user interface takes the third 90% of the time."

Re:This is going to make the 90% rule interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117093)

Aw hell, don't feel bad; it's going to take two week, just to figure out if we can add an s to the week in the article title.

Re:This is going to make the 90% rule interesting (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117015)

Oh, I think it's more of:

How long and how much effort will it take to fix it . . . ?

It depends. How much money do you have . . . ?

Re:This is going to make the 90% rule interesting (1)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117215)

They have a lot of money to throw at it, they've already spent hundreds of millions.

At some point the project doesn't get done any sooner by adding more people (and money) on the project. This is primarily because of the effort it takes to coordinate so many people.

Or to use the famous example from Mythical Man Month, one woman can produce a child in nine months, but nine women won't produce it for you in one month.

Re:This is going to make the 90% rule interesting (1)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117193)

And if estimates are varying that wildly, then the estimates are just guesses.

And estimates that are just guesses always take longer than you'd expect.

Re:This is going to make the 90% rule interesting (1)

TechNeilogy (2948399) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117407)

The web problems are unfortunate, but are to be expected and are managable. Most non-programming people don't realize that, even if they are early adopters, by the time they encounter a web site it is in essentially revision three or four or higher. And there are still problems then. What is needed is good backup on the human resources side (e.g. 800 numbers) until the bugs are worked out.

Wordpress? Really?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116845)

The downtime shouldn't surprise anyone once you realize the fact that they built these sites on top of WordPress. Really?

Re:Wordpress? Really?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45116863)

The downtime shouldn't surprise anyone once you realize the fact that they built these sites on top of WordPress. Really?

The bilt it in the cofee scripz man. i workd on itz

Seems fine to me (3, Informative)

ugen (93902) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116907)

I was able to register fairly early (around the 3rd) - when the site was still undergoing the initial onslaught of gawkers. It seems to be working ok now - no more "please wait, we are too busy" page at initial login, logging in takes a few seconds. Once in - I am able to search and view policies for appropriate states. The only real issue I found so far is that some of the insurance companies make it difficult to find actual policy prospectus. BCBS does a decent job with direct links, a few others make you look it up in a list by name (which may or may not match the name they present on the main site) and one (Cigna) has broken links that lead nowhere (but their rates suck anyway).

All in all seems about as usable as I've ever seen in a government site. A heck of a lot better than the tax payment system feds have or any of the state DMV sites I had to deal with (and we are talking "red" states, who clearly should know better, right?)

Re:Seems fine to me (2)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117273)

That's my experience too. When it first opened about two weeks ago it was totally borked.

Now it seems to be OK. I've been able to register and go through the process of signing up. No more wait screens.

The news of course is behind a bit. It doesn't help that some people with a political agenda are calling it a failure.

It isn't.

Re:Seems fine to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117345)

I was also able to go through the site's pages, with few "Please wait..." - some lasted a few minutes. I was one of these that needed to get a quote, and so I filled out all of the pages, but I have never heard anything back. It's been a week. I don't get it. I was left with the impression that although it seemed to be "ok" it really isn't. We'll see.

Two months, eh? (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116919)

Seems to me that I read that people using the Exchange need sign up for an approved insurance policy by Dec. 15, if they want to have it go into effect Jan 1.

Which suggests very strongly that if they take that two months, then a lot of people are going to be looking forward to penalties come tax-time next year.

Re:Two months, eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117369)

Only if you don't know that you actually have until March of next year to avoid the penalty for the year, and that there are ways to assert that you had some hardship that prevented you from getting coverage.

And of course the penalty you're talking about doesn't even apply till 2015. So they have a nice long time to get prepared and avoid paying the penalty. Which was deliberately chosen to be a low figure to start off rather than punitive, it's a slight push.

Re:Two months, eh? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117399)

"Which suggests very strongly that if they take that two months, then a lot of people are going to be looking forward to penalties come tax-time next year."

It's COMPLETELY unreasonable to expect people to find and implement a policy that fits them, given this huge mess of bureaucracy and glitches, in 60 days or so.

What's that old adage? (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116931)

That 20% of the code/problems take 80% of the time? Perhaps the developers picked the wrong 2 of: fast, cheap, or good. [wikipedia.org] .

Re:What's that old adage? (3, Informative)

philip.paradis (2580427) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116985)

Perhaps the developers picked the wrong 2 of: fast, cheap, or good.

Developers don't typically get to decide that. Management makes that sort of decision. If folks are interested, a full list of ACA contractors [sunlightfoundation.com] is also available.

Re:What's that old adage? (2)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116997)

Considering the bill became law in 2010, the fast option should be unneeded. Unfortunately, whoever started this project also felt the other two options were unneeded as well.

Re:What's that old adage? (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116999)

Well they sure as shit didn't pick cheap. $400 million? Haven't seen good yet. And it was not fast at the beginning. So a trifecta of fail!

Re:What's that old adage? (2)

philip.paradis (2580427) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117049)

The best part is that USD $634 million has already been spent, with more to come.

Re:What's that old adage? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117029)

I get the feeling that they picked all 3 of: slow, expensive, and bad. It cost way too much, they had plenty of time, and from what I hear it's poorly written.

dom

Easy solution! (2)

Guppy06 (410832) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116953)

Each state could use resources given to them by the federal government to build their own exchanges!

Oh, wait...

90% done ... (1)

jamesl (106902) | 1 year,8 days | (#45116965)

... 90% to go.

The damage it does to health care (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117001)

The damage it does to health care could take generations to fix.
 
But, hey, I got a few tens-of-thousands of dollars invested in the "health care" industry. This has been a big boost for my stocks. If the CEO of the company I've invested in is correct it'll only get better over the next few years. And this is an established company that has an outwardly legitimate look to it, not just big talk from some start up.
 
Thanks for paying my retirement, suckers.

fire SAIC. fire all the defense contractors (2)

darue (2699381) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117033)

get a new team. start over from scratch. it's not that fucking hard a problem.

Re:fire SAIC. fire all the defense contractors (4, Insightful)

Skapare (16644) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117257)

The stupid site won't even give real information until after you sign up. I don't want to give them sign-up info unless I decide to actually sign-up. But I cannot get the info to make that decision with.

Re:fire SAIC. fire all the defense contractors (1)

PPH (736903) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117631)

So, make up a fake name, sign up and get the prices and whatever you need. Then, if you decide you want it, sign up for real.

Lets see them clean out those data tables after this.

Basic rule of project management (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117063)

Any "percent complete" provided by a developer is nonsense. Especially since the progression you'll typically hear is something like 50%, then 70%, then 90%, then 95%, then 96%, then 97%, then 99%, then "I just have to do XYZ", then "I just have to do ABC", ...

The way you actually figure out where you stand is by having a list of tasks and estimates that are small enough that each task is expected to be a couple of days worth of work at most, and then rate tasks either complete or not complete (and it's not complete until QA says it is).

Slow and steady? (1)

Rolpa (3036845) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117065)

Remember when Steam sucked? I sure do. Software typically takes a period of time to gestate to full functionality - I get that. Of course, Steam only managed my computer games - not my health insurance! I suppose I'll play Obamacare as a whole by ear at this point...

Jesus, Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117081)

You guys keep posting this anti-PPACA drivel to the front page. Stuff breaks, especially early on. Healthcare.gov would have to be down for the better part of the next two years to match the site that our current private for-profit insurance company maintains. Is not blacklisting people for life from health insurance, along with the establishment of regulated health insurance marketplaces, really that bad? You'd think it was the apocalypse if you just read Slashdot.

The Web Site is as perfect as Mr. Obama (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117085)

Mr. Obama is our saviour. He is doing what no other leader has done for us. He is giving equality to 99% of Americans. This is important. Health care is important to everyone, and it is now a right we all can have equally for 99% of us.

By us agreeing to have Mr. Obama and the 1% care for us, feed us, educate us, and providing for all of our needs, we are making a better place for everyone.

Mr. Obama is our saviour, we need to obey him, and the wealthy people who put him in power. If we don't Obey Mr. Obama, than the world will be in total darkness. Mr. Obama is our light, our love, our life. Without Mr. Obama, we are nothing, we are lost, we are in despair.

Correction: Add 2 Years At Least (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117189)

So today is Sunday and I went "poking" around the www.healthcare.gov and "coveredxy.com" (xy = 2 character code for state market exchanges like the post office code for states).

From a modern (i.e. 2013) IT perspective (given NSA's copying willy-nilly) its a fail.

That however may be Obama's hidden agenda: the more people who cannot apply will be subject to an IRS imposed $95 dollar (for individual for instance) penalty fee some April 15 2014.

So a new question is: Is the $95 penalty owned by the IRS or a bank of the Treasury Department or a private account owned by Barak Obama?

And another questions is: Come Oct. 1 2014 how many new federal prison inmates from the Obama Care will be filling the Federal Prison System?

$400M on a $93M contract? (1)

schwit1 (797399) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117235)

Hopefully the costs of obamacare are a little more accurate or this could be a very short trip.

It will take 2 years (1)

Skapare (16644) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117247)

... at least ... to get it designed right. That's because they need to throw away everything they have done so far and start over. They need to actually build the site rather than try to mish-mash a bunch of separate web products.

The whole fucking summary is TROLL. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117285)

It's the Affordable Care Act, stupid. There is no such thing as "Obamacare", which is a derogatory term coined by teabagger republicans. Speaking of which, the whole gang of them from the Koch brothers and Don Trump along with their lackeys in congress should line up and shot for insurrection against the United States.

Re:The whole fucking summary is TROLL. (1)

rubycodez (864176) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117491)

you're funny. Obama has violated more of the Constitution than even Bush and Cheney.

It is "Obamacare", he used all his collateral to get that mess passed. He and the Democrat Congress owns it. And it's already failing.

That's OK (1)

Kohath (38547) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117301)

I'm sure no one will get sick between now and then. And if they do, it won't matter. Because when government hurts people, government always gets a pass.

If They Only Had Obama's Election Campaign IT (5, Informative)

Kagato (116051) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117389)

What people don't realize is the private sector contractors in Gov't IT have little to do with regular private IT contracting. In order to gain these contracts you need to basically game the formula used to award the contracts. It's a bit more complicated than just having the lowest bid. A lot of it has to do with things like the number of Phd and Master degree workers you have to offer. This often leads to staffing composed of people who have unrelated degrees or people who are from diploma mills.

The Obamacare IT is no more or less messed up than any other gov't system of recent times.

Sadly, Obama can't just raid Silicon valley for some top tier talent to make a new system. That's illegal. Instead the contracts go to companies you've likely never heard of that specialize in sucking off the gov't teet. I'm sure 1/2 the budget was wasted making a 5000 page technical specification document complete with overdone pie in the sky UML diagrams no one understands.

That's the way things will continue so long as the contracting process doesn't take into account the previous success of the contractors work force.

In Soviet Russia (1)

Roachie (2180772) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117513)

Government Healthcare fixes YOU!!

Looks like ... (1)

PPH (736903) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117563)

... the House GOP leadership is getting their delay in implementation after all.

Stop the presses (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 days | (#45117583)

Stop the presses: A new complex web based system fails under load and dog bites man. The proper strategy of course would have been a phased roll-out but that was precluded by political issues. I actually encourage people to opt out of health insurance and pay a penalty tax since the next best thing to no taxes are those paid by others.

Typical (2)

craigminah (1885846) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117609)

This is fairly typical in government contracting...pay a lot and get something that barely functions but now you got to pay more to finish it because you've invested too much already to just throw it out. Once it's up and able to handle the customer base I'm sure they'll consider adding security or protect the data somehow which will cost another ton of money. They'll perfect it, but at what cost, how long, and why didn't they do this earlier? Some states' exchanges have been up and running great but they (the states) started creating them earlier.

We have to code it before we know what's in it (1)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | 1 year,8 days | (#45117681)

Obligitory: "We have to code it before we know what's in it."

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?