In article ,
Oren wrote:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 11:12:43 -0600, bud-- wrote:

An exchange is very complicated to implement,

Why is that?

Apparently you haven't written software. And don't know how much is
involved in an exchange.

I'm not a programmer. Reading about the state exchange in my state
(NV) and learning that the Canadian company that set up the health
care .gov site, it is complicated.

The CA** company (CGI) hired ~ 50 subcontractors. Each wrote a
module(s) to perform certain tasks. You have the initial application,
another site creates the actual account and so on down the line. When
one bug is fixed, then another bug is created. Each web portal has to
get through firewall's for federal agencies (IRS, SSA, etc), things
like that, which then have to be fixed when they fail. The production
rollout was not tested very well in the sandbox. Not ready for prime
time - $600 million bucks over several years.

The NV exchange goes down every night (10PM - 2AM) for "maintenance".

"Maintenance" might mean "backup" (at least in part). That's certainly
something for which I'd want to keep a good backup.

Of course, they probably have some fancy RAID that backs it up
all the time.

Cindy Hamilton
--

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
In article ,
Oren wrote:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 11:12:43 -0600, bud-- wrote:

An exchange is very complicated to implement,

Why is that?

Apparently you haven't written software. And don't know how much is
involved in an exchange.

I'm not a programmer. Reading about the state exchange in my state
(NV) and learning that the Canadian company that set up the health
care .gov site, it is complicated.

The CA** company (CGI) hired ~ 50 subcontractors. Each wrote a
module(s) to perform certain tasks. You have the initial application,
another site creates the actual account and so on down the line. When
one bug is fixed, then another bug is created. Each web portal has to
get through firewall's for federal agencies (IRS, SSA, etc), things
like that, which then have to be fixed when they fail. The production
rollout was not tested very well in the sandbox. Not ready for prime
time - $600 million bucks over several years.

The NV exchange goes down every night (10PM - 2AM) for "maintenance".

"Maintenance" might mean "backup" (at least in part). That's certainly
something for which I'd want to keep a good backup.

Of course, they probably have some fancy RAID that backs it up
all the time.

Cindy Hamilton

Hmmm,
CGI? I used to work for their local office on contract after I retired.
RAID is not really 100% reliable array. Full or incremental BU for off
site storage is real safe BU. RAID array can collapse when certain HW
failure occurs, not often but it is known to happen.

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 13:28:03 -0600, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
In article ,
Oren wrote:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 11:12:43 -0600, bud-- wrote:

An exchange is very complicated to implement,

Why is that?

Apparently you haven't written software. And don't know how much is
involved in an exchange.

I'm not a programmer. Reading about the state exchange in my state
(NV) and learning that the Canadian company that set up the health
care .gov site, it is complicated.

The CA** company (CGI) hired ~ 50 subcontractors. Each wrote a
module(s) to perform certain tasks. You have the initial application,
another site creates the actual account and so on down the line. When
one bug is fixed, then another bug is created. Each web portal has to
get through firewall's for federal agencies (IRS, SSA, etc), things
like that, which then have to be fixed when they fail. The production
rollout was not tested very well in the sandbox. Not ready for prime
time - $600 million bucks over several years.

The NV exchange goes down every night (10PM - 2AM) for "maintenance".

"Maintenance" might mean "backup" (at least in part). That's certainly
something for which I'd want to keep a good backup.

Of course, they probably have some fancy RAID that backs it up
all the time.

Cindy Hamilton


insert Cindy, for some reason your postings do not propagate to
mine, even over days, so I do not see them.

As far as "backup" goes, that is not the problem. They are trying to
fix bugs in the government calamity that was rolled out by armatures
in the government. Fix one bug and introduce another hundred...

50 subcontractors writing different modules that will play well with
each other.

Hmmm,
CGI? I used to work for their local office on contract after I retired.
RAID is not really 100% reliable array. Full or incremental BU for off
site storage is real safe BU. RAID array can collapse when certain HW
failure occurs, not often but it is known to happen.

CGI is reported to be the company involved in the mess. The same
company?

On Thursday, October 17, 2013 3:28:03 PM UTC-4, Tony Hwang wrote:
Cindy Hamilton wrote:

In article ,

Oren wrote:

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 11:12:43 -0600, bud-- wrote:



An exchange is very complicated to implement,



Why is that?



Apparently you haven't written software. And don't know how much is

involved in an exchange.



I'm not a programmer. Reading about the state exchange in my state

(NV) and learning that the Canadian company that set up the health

care .gov site, it is complicated.



The CA** company (CGI) hired ~ 50 subcontractors. Each wrote a

module(s) to perform certain tasks. You have the initial application,

another site creates the actual account and so on down the line. When

one bug is fixed, then another bug is created. Each web portal has to

get through firewall's for federal agencies (IRS, SSA, etc), things

like that, which then have to be fixed when they fail. The production

rollout was not tested very well in the sandbox. Not ready for prime

time - $600 million bucks over several years.



The NV exchange goes down every night (10PM - 2AM) for "maintenance".



"Maintenance" might mean "backup" (at least in part). That's certainly

something for which I'd want to keep a good backup.



Of course, they probably have some fancy RAID that backs it up

all the time.



Cindy Hamilton



Hmmm,

CGI? I used to work for their local office on contract after I retired.

RAID is not really 100% reliable array. Full or incremental BU for off

site storage is real safe BU. RAID array can collapse when certain HW

failure occurs, not often but it is known to happen.

No one is saying that it's a disk problem or even any hardware
problem at all. If it was a RAID issue, it one have been fixed
in hours or a day. It's two weeks.

And despite Buds claims that this is normal, to be expected, it's
complicated to implement, etc, I'm amazed that anyone would buy that.
It's a colossal failure that's almost never seen in the private sector.
And if it happens, you see apologies, a CEO saying that they will
find out what went wrong, who's accountable, hold them responsible,
etc. That's leadership. In this case, all you have are pathetic
denials. You can't even just download a policy and see what's in
it without "APPLYING". And despite the fact that all the NSA
secrets are out all over the web, no one in this administration
will answer the simple question of how many people have signed up.
That apparently is a big state secret that the stupid public
should be kept from knowing. Amazing.

And as far as accountability, the few state dept employees that
were responsible for denying the repeated requests for increased security
at Benghazi, that determined that the almost non-existent security
was perfectly fine, what happened to them? They were suspended for
9 months or so with pay, then given their jobs back. So, the
punishment was 9 months vacation. And the one idiot most responsible
actually testified to Congress that she still believes the security
at Benghazi was adequate and appropriate. In other words, this
termite not only got a vacation, but now she's back where she
can get more people killed.

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 13:28:03 -0600, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
In article ,
Oren wrote:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 11:12:43 -0600, bud-- wrote:

An exchange is very complicated to implement,

Why is that?

Apparently you haven't written software. And don't know how much is
involved in an exchange.

I'm not a programmer. Reading about the state exchange in my state
(NV) and learning that the Canadian company that set up the health
care .gov site, it is complicated.

The CA** company (CGI) hired ~ 50 subcontractors. Each wrote a
module(s) to perform certain tasks. You have the initial application,
another site creates the actual account and so on down the line. When
one bug is fixed, then another bug is created. Each web portal has to
get through firewall's for federal agencies (IRS, SSA, etc), things
like that, which then have to be fixed when they fail. The production
rollout was not tested very well in the sandbox. Not ready for prime
time - $600 million bucks over several years.

The NV exchange goes down every night (10PM - 2AM) for "maintenance".

"Maintenance" might mean "backup" (at least in part). That's certainly
something for which I'd want to keep a good backup.

Of course, they probably have some fancy RAID that backs it up
all the time.

Cindy Hamilton

Hmmm,
CGI? I used to work for their local office on contract after I retired.
RAID is not really 100% reliable array. Full or incremental BU for off
site storage is real safe BU. RAID array can collapse when certain HW
failure occurs, not often but it is known to happen.
Raid 50 should withstand anything short od an emp or atomic attack.
That's 2 mirrored raid 5 arrays, at it's core - with separate
controllers for each array. One is a mirror of the other.

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:47:56 GMT, (Cindy Hamilton)
wrote:

In article ,
Oren wrote:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 11:12:43 -0600, bud-- wrote:

An exchange is very complicated to implement,

Why is that?

Apparently you haven't written software. And don't know how much is
involved in an exchange.

I'm not a programmer. Reading about the state exchange in my state
(NV) and learning that the Canadian company that set up the health
care .gov site, it is complicated.

The CA** company (CGI) hired ~ 50 subcontractors. Each wrote a
module(s) to perform certain tasks. You have the initial application,
another site creates the actual account and so on down the line. When
one bug is fixed, then another bug is created. Each web portal has to
get through firewall's for federal agencies (IRS, SSA, etc), things
like that, which then have to be fixed when they fail. The production
rollout was not tested very well in the sandbox. Not ready for prime
time - $600 million bucks over several years.

The NV exchange goes down every night (10PM - 2AM) for "maintenance".

"Maintenance" might mean "backup" (at least in part). That's certainly
something for which I'd want to keep a good backup.

That's absurd. If that were the case, the entire financial system
would grind to a halt every night for hours.

Of course, they probably have some fancy RAID that backs it up
all the time.

It goes a lot deeper than that, if they had a clue.

On 10/18/2013 8:29 AM, wrote:

One explanation of what's wrong I saw on the evening news.
They claim that the website can't complete the applications
because people can't get through the verification process.
They showed the actual screens people go through. It asked:

Did you take out a loan in 2010 with one of these banks:

A - Bank of America
B - Hudson Savings
C - etc

Which of the following streets did you previously live at:

A - Walla Walla Drive
B - Mockinbird Lane
ets, etc


So, it looks like they must be pulling up a credit report
and trying to match you to that in order to apply. And it
fails while trying to do that matching, exactly why, IDK.
It could be they have some of the info wrong, etc. so
you can't correctly answer it.

But the bigger questions a

1 - Why is this even necessary? If you give them your
name, dob, ss#, address, why do they have to match you
to anything? I've applied for health insurance before
and never had to answer questions about where I previously
had a loan. previous address, etc.

If all you need is the information you mention, fraud is very easy.
That information is readily available even to your family members that
may be willing to scam you.

My bank has a similar signup procedure to add another level of security.
Many people in their job have access to simple information such ad
DOB, SS# and address of many people. Not hard at all to steal identity.
What I do not know is where some of these people lived in 1970 or if
they ever had an account with Idaho Savings and Potato Bank. Sure, it
isw a PITA to go through that, but there are many thieves out there too.

On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 05:29:47 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

In the media I've seen some Democrat hacks try to blame the
Republicans because they allegedly wouldn't provide the necessary funding
to properly build the website. Funny, we didn't hear a word about
that until the whole thing failed. I saw a VP from the Canadian
company that got the contract testifying to Congress in August,
saying how everything was going peachy keen, all ready to go,
etc.


Some news reports say the system was only tested one week before it
was deployed into production. Dumb.

And right here, you've heard accusations of states and conservatives
deliberately crashing the website.


That was a giggle. If the states can't connect to the fed system,
then it HAS to be conservatives that caused it.

One explanation of what's wrong I saw on the evening news.
They claim that the website can't complete the applications
because people can't get through the verification process.
They showed the actual screens people go through. It asked:


One reporter called the 800 number for help. They asked for his home
address, so he explained to the help center the web site _never_ asked
for that information. The help line said "well then we can't help
you."

Did you take out a loan in 2010 with one of these banks:

A - Bank of America
B - Hudson Savings
C - etc

Which of the following streets did you previously live at:

A - Walla Walla Drive
B - Mockinbird Lane
ets, etc


So, it looks like they must be pulling up a credit report
and trying to match you to that in order to apply. And it
fails while trying to do that matching, exactly why, IDK.
It could be they have some of the info wrong, etc. so
you can't correctly answer it.


Some health providers are getting bad data from the site, too.

But the bigger questions a

1 - Why is this even necessary? If you give them your
name, dob, ss#, address, why do they have to match you
to anything? I've applied for health insurance before
and never had to answer questions about where I previously
had a loan. previous address, etc.


Why are they asking / wanting one to register to vote?

2 - If this verification thing is the problem, then
it should have been found out a long time ago when
they should have run batches of test cases through
it.

They only tested the system for one week; according to some reports.

Keep in mind this will be the largest collection of data known to man,
held by the government - ALL in a single place.

If you have one green eye and one blue eye, Uncle Sam will know!