Category: Government

  • Excellence in Government IT

    Consider the sets "Excellence" and "Government IT." There is a great deal of evidence that these are non-overlapping sets. Put another way, the phrase "excellence in government IT" is an oxymoron. Of course, there are people who think otherwise. Mostly, these are government workers and their enablers.

    Digital Government Awards

    It appears there are organizations promoting and celebrating "digital government." Who knew?

    Part of what these guys do is hold awards ceremonies honoring the best, the brightest and the most accomplished. There was an awards ceremony for New York in 2014.

    Awards

    30 people were individually honored for Outstanding IT Service and Support. In addition, 10 awards were given in various categories. One of the categories is related to one of my favorite subjects. The award, "Demonstrated Excellence in Project Management," is a double killer: excellence in project management, which you mostly demonstrate by chucking it over the side of the boat, and excellence in government IT, which is pretty much the null set. So "government project management?" If there ever was a candidate for something emptier than the null set, that's got to be near the head of the line.

    One naturally wonders what magic project won this coveted award. This project was so good that the leader was also awarded the Best of New York Leadership Award. Here are the highlights: Won
    This is a bit hard to figure out. Mostly, it appears, he spent money and outsourced work. He put a little data center into a big central one, and by the way bought a bunch of new equipment (that's what "modernizing WCB's infrastructure" means), and he dumped thousands of cases to an outsourcer ("third-party administrator" sounds more official, doesn't it?), I guess because those poor government workers were just overworked.

    But I was unsatisfied. I really wanted to know how he got the top award for project management. So I clicked to find out: ZAnd I was rewarded with this page, from the organization that leads, promotes and awards excellence in digital government:

    ZZ

    I was truly impressed. I always wondered how all those government agencies, some of which are bound to have bright people who truly want to serve the public, managed to deliver such uniformly expensive, inefficient, labor-intensive systems that often don't work. Now we have the answer: they have an organization that leads them and shows them how its done!

    By giving awards, they in effect define excellence down. Think about this guy singled out for the leadership award: he bought a bunch of equipment (for less? more? who knows?), moved to another data center and outsourced some work. That's the best of the best! Think about what everyone else accomplished during the year!

  • The Government wants to Help Uber’s Software Quality

    It's reported that New York City's Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC) wants to pre-approve new software releases by ride companies like Lyft and Uber. Since the TLC is well-known to be heavily staffed with software experts, what can be bad about this idea? Other than just about everything, that is?

    The proposal

    Here's what they're saying:

    Uber

    Uber and Lyft have to buy smartphones and give them to the TLC because the Commission runs such a tight budget that there's no way it could afford the required thousands of dollars. Oh, wait … the planned 2015 revenue of the TLC is projected to be $545.6 million, with expenses of $61,045,000. That leaves just $480 million or so, which is undoubtedly already committed to something or other, which is probably terribly important.

    Let's assume it happens. How is it going to work? Uber gives a release to the TLC, which takes exactly how long to test it how rigorously by what means? By the time it gets around to organizing to test one release, another will have arrived. So the pressure will immediately come to have fewer, larger releases. Then will come the time when the TLC approves a release and there's a bug. There will be commissions, reviews, and a big operation will be set up to implement industry best-practices, government-style. Things will get even slower and longer, and government tentacles will start weaving their way into Uber's software development organization. In the end, New York will end up getting a small number of releases, way after the rest of the world has them, buggier than everyone else, and the costs will be passed on to the drivers and riders.

    Why?

    Why

    Right. Sure.

    The Reality

    Governments can't build software that works in any reasonable time. See this.

    No matter how hard they tried, software testing in the lab just doesn't work. See this.

    They will press to have fewer releases, when more frequent releases are the key to good software quality. See this.

    Finally, most important of all, we don't need to be protected, thank you very much. If it doesn't work, people will stop using it, and the company will either fix its problems or go out of business. That's the way the greatest wealth-creating and poverty-eliminating system ever invented works.

  • Bureaucracy, Regulation and Computer Security

    There always seems to be a bureaucracy ready to tell you how to keep your computer systems secure; or, worse, to tell you what you must do to be in compliance with the regulations promulgated by the bureaucracy. "It's for your own good," they say.

    If you are forced to comply with some regulation or other, you'd better comply. But you're a fool if you confuse compliance with keeping the assets of your business actually, you know, secure.

    Bureaucrats can't keep simple physical things secure

    Computers are complicated. Construction sites? Not so much. Fences, cameras, sensors, guards and an alert, well-managed staff should do the trick. But when bureaucrats are in charge? Forget it.

    David Velazquez was in charge of security at the World Trade Center construction site. Mr. Velazquez is a Columbia University graduate and had a 31 year career at the FBI, ending as head of the Newark field office. You might think well of the FBI, I don't know, but what I do know is that it's a giant government bureaucracy, and Mr. Valazquez appears to have applied the lessons he learned there on his new job.

    Here is one of the crack guards "on duty" at the work site:

    Sleeping guard
     

    That may explain why a group of guys was able to get to the top and jump off, recording video all the way down:

      Base jumper

    Then a kid slipped through a fence and made it all the way to the roof, unheeded by sleeping guards:

    Security kid

    The biggest, baddest bureaucrats of all can't keep their own computers secure

    Alright, maybe the FBI are amateurs. Let's go to the best of the best, the scariest cybersecurity experts of all, the NSA.

    NSA

    These guys are in charge of keeping us secure from the worst of the worst. A cover story in Wired Magazine told us all about it.

    Wired cover

    Loads of people using piles and piles of super-secret cyber magic are on the case:

    Wired story 1

    If anyone can achieve cyber-security, surely these guys are it:

    Wired story 3

    But we all know how that turned out. It just took one moderately clever person with bad intentions and all the vaunted cyber-wonderfulness was for naught. Among Mr. Snowden's myriad revelations was the previously secret budget of the cyber-bureaucrats of the NSA, an astounding $52 billion. Do you think if they doubled the budget they could have done a better job? Hmmmm.

    Bureaucrats and Security

    Why should you listen to someone who can't do it themselves? If you want to stop smoking, do you eagerly take the advice of someone who smokes? If you want to get rich, do you take advice from poor people? Bureaucrats are sure they're right — because they have no competition, and there's no one who has the power to tell them otherwise.

    Why this matters

    The laughable ineffectiveness of bureaucratic security in general, and cybersecurity in particular, can matter a great deal to you. Here's why:

    • If you do what the bureaucrats tell you to do, you'll spend a lot of money.
    • Following the regulations makes everything slower and less efficient. You'll hurt your business.
    • If you get conned into thinking that following the regulations means that you're secure, you're in big trouble. You will be more vulnerable to business-damaging breach than ever before.

    What you should do is simple: establish effective and efficient security by the best means available, which will typically be unrelated to what the authorities solemnly declare. Then, do as much regulation-following as you need to do, whether it's PCI or any of the rest of the alphabet soup, to avoid punishment.

    Is this cynical? Of course! But it's also real life.

  • Software Quality Horror Tales: Electronic Diversity Visas

    The State Department of the US has inflicted unimaginable pain and suffering on tens of thousands of people throughout the world through their electronic Diversity Immigrant Visa program. It's a highly visible and public example of what's wrong with software development in general, and software quality in particular. Sadly, it's no different in principle from countless numbers of other projects, doomed from inception by inappropriate standards and techniques.

    The Facts

    The Diversity Lottery Program is just that — a lottery. More than ten million non-US-citizens worldwide apply for tens of thousands of slots that can lead to US citizenship. Only this time, after notifying the "winners," who started spending money most of them didn't have to comply with the requirements to complete the process, the State Department cancelled the lottery and invalidated the results. Why? A bug in the computer program that chose the winners.

    The Human Consequences

    From the Wall Street Journal:

    Ever since he traveled from his home near Yaounde, Cameroon, on a scholarship to Michigan State University in 2009, Dieudonné Kuate dreamed of immigrating to the United States.

    As a visiting graduate student in epidemiology, he marveled at the sophistication of the chemistry labs and the excellence of the teaching. There was no comparison to his university in Yaounde, where he shared a cramped 27-square-foot room with three other students.

    One of eight children, Mr. Kuate grew up on a poor farm in the western plateau town of Banjoun. His parents couldn't read or write. Mr. Kuate is the only child in his family to complete university. "My dreams have been to be a top researcher in my field of specialty. The only place I see these goals being realized is the United States," says the 31-year-old Mr. Kuate, who returned to Yaounde last year and finished his Ph.D. in chemistry.

    For the past six years, Mr. Kuate has applied for the State Department's annual green-card lottery, and, like 15 million other people, he applied again this year. The 20-year-old program offers about 50,000 people a year a chance to win permanent residence in the U.S.—and a ticket to the American Dream.

    Denied six times, Mr. Kuate finally saw his number come up on May 1.

    "There is no English word to express my happiness when I discovered that I was selected," said Mr. Kuate, whose first name means "God given."

    [GREENCARD1] Emmanuel Tumanjong for The Wall Street Journal

    Within days, his older brother sold family land in Banjoun for around $4,400 for Mr. Kuate to use for application fees, medical examinations and to start a new life in the U.S., he said. His mother believed God had intervened: "According to her, I was going to travel to the white man's country and see how to help other family members who have not gone far in book work," he said.

    But on May 13, those hopes were abruptly dashed. After logging on to the State Department website, Mr. Kuate said, "I saw a message saying the lottery had been canceled."

    Mr. Kuate was among 22,000 people around the world mistakenly informed last month that they had won the lottery. There had been a technical glitch and the lottery would have to be held again, the State Department said, explaining that a computer had selected 90% of the winners from the first two days of the application window instead of the full 30-day registration period.

    The software

    It's pretty clear that this is one of the more trivial programming jobs on the planet. I shudder to think how much it cost to build, how long it took, and the whole environment that was created that made it (I'm sorry to say) likely that a horrific bug like this would be inflicted on so many innocent people.

    Since I have no access to the code or project documents, I will comment on a couple of things that are publicly available.

    Take a look at the Department's page that announces the status of the 2012 lottery. Play around with it a bit, as I did.

    Did you want to find more information? Did you take advantage of the kind offer to provide more information:

    More information is available on our website:

    http://dvlottery.state.gov

    Perhaps, then, you noticed that the link leads you to the same page you're already reading!! Kafka couldn't have done it better. No doubt this was the careful work of the Division of Self-referential self-reference of the Department of Redundancy Department.

    Did you take note of the fact that all entries were submitted electronically between October 5, 2010 and November 3, 2010? Which implies that starting on November 4, 2010, they had all their input data? All they had to do was run the lottery program a couple times on the input, run some checks to make sure it was working properly on the new data set, then run it "for real" and publish the results. To be generous, this should have taken about a day. OK, it's the government, we'll give them a week. Really? Geeez…alright, a month! No. NO WAY. $%&$%^& SIX MONTHS!!!!??? ^&(^^&* MORE THAN SIX MONTHS???!!!

    With that much time, this should have been the most proven-to-be-perfect program in history. PhD students should have been able to break new ground in proving the certainty of correctness of this program. It should have been possible to run it a number of times that compares favorably to the number of grains of sand on all the beaches on planet earth.

    I love the fact that there's a transcript of a statement on the subject by "David Donahue, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Visa Services." The statement location and date are unspecified. The date of posting is not given. The fact that he made a statement verbally rather than just talking with the public via the web site kind of implies that he's incapable of writing or typing. His "internet department" (or whatever) must be responsible for the web site. And it implies that he still has a job! For some reason, I find that one really annoying! I guess you can screw over incredible numbers of people on behalf of the US Government and suffer no personal consequences. It must be OK to do that!

    There's a lot more to be said about this fiasco, but I'm tired.

    Conclusion

    Software quality. We need a revolution! Stop the Horror! End the Terror!

     

Links

Recent Posts

Categories