Looks like anti Obamacare propaganda has not worked

[ocean515]

Hmmm, is there a reason you're still responding to my posts? Gotta have the last word do ya? Alright, go ahead have the last word so you can stop wasting both our time.

The irony in your post is staggering. Thanks for permission to point that out.

eace

 

[274ina]

I think you just posted this in the wrong thread to the wrong person because none of that makes any sense or is in line with this discussion.

No its correct.

See your banks are a totall failure and yet people like you still support the criminals of Wall Street. They get $700B for jets and bentlys and no complaint.

I get a few bucks for a life neccesity of HC, and you blather out "failure" bla bla bla.

How about you apply the same thinking to WS............

 

[Papa bull]

No its correct.

See your banks are a totall failure and yet people like you still support the criminals of Wall Street. They get $700B for jets and bentlys and no complaint.

I get a few bucks for a life neccesity of HC, and you blather out "failure" bla bla bla.

How about you apply the same thinking to WS............

What the f*** are you talking about? Put down the rabid lib talking points rolodex and try to understand what is being discussed. You sound like one of those spammers that posts some ridiculously disassociated general purpose comment along with all their stupid links. Try to find a thread about bankers and wall street if you want to bash bankers and wall street and jets and "bentlys" and whatever other drivel you want to get into. This was about the embarrassingly incompetent launch of the federally mandated insurance exchange websites.

 

[274ina]

What the f*** are you talking about? Put down the rabid lib talking points rolodex and try to understand what is being discussed. You sound like one of those spammers that posts some ridiculously disassociated general purpose comment along with all their stupid links. Try to find a thread about bankers and wall street if you want to bash bankers and wall street and jets and "bentlys" and whatever other drivel you want to get into. This was about the embarrassingly incompetent launch of the federally mandated insurance exchange websites.

Demand is so high the site is down.

2.8 million trying to sign up in 24 hrs looks like total success to me!

Yes I know you people always need to keep all the morons only looking at the tiny box of lies you present, but its best to
ridicule your ideas by expanding that box.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Demand is so high the site is down.

2.8 million trying to sign up in 24 hrs looks like total success to me!

Your shtick is clown-like. People believe they are mandated to purchase insurance and are wanting to know how much more it will cost them next year.

As for what "looks like success" to you, the law itself looks like success to you, even as Bill Clinton points out how it harms middle and lower class families, is "bad policy," and is "obviously not fair."

But that's because you consider successful not what helps middle and lower class Americans, but what you can count as a Democrat victory.

 

[Papa bull]

Demand is so high the site is down.

2.8 million trying to sign up in 24 hrs looks like total success to me!

Yes I know you people always need to keep all the morons only looking at the tiny box of lies you present, but its best to
ridicule your ideas by expanding that box.

2.8 million "hits" doesn't mean 2.8 million people tried to sign up. In reality what it probably means is 200,000 people tried a dozen times and gave up. It's still broken, by the way. Notice there weren't any numbers on the number of signups in Ohio? Notice that the federal officials declined to say how many people signed up in Ohio (while they were happy to do so for states that actually got some signups)? Notice that?

Here you go. Put this on and don't say I never gave you anything.

 

[Papa bull]

Taken moments ago. Let me show you what should be beside the word "failure" in the dictionary:

 

[rjay]

Well duh! Folks are signing up for free stuff, what do you expect. And no, crashing on the first sign of demand is not the normal course for website design and management. In fact it betrays very poor design and implementation.

Look, we insured more people than any other single country and our uninsured were a small percentage of our population. But even so, those uninsured (long term and recently BECAUSE of Obamacare) numbered in the millions. Any web developers or server admin worth the bundles they're getting paid by the government to do this work, should have been more than ready for the demand.

I assume you mean insured with Health Insurance. Other countries sell health insurance as an adjunct to the normal healthcare they recieve for being a citizen in a country that cares about it's people. In other countries people buy health insurance so they can get a private room in the hospital or so they can get coverage for prescription drugs or for other extras. In the U.S. people buy health insurance so that they don't lose their house if they have to stay in the hospital for a month. Of course there is always a chance that the coverage you can afford doesn't cover you for the procedure or test you need. The richer you are, the better coverage you can afford for your family. Of course because not everyone can afford the monthly premiums it takes to get the best possible coverage, the U.S. is the only industrialized country where you can be wiped out financially, because a loved one has a catastrophic illness/accident.

Given these circumstances I would be shocked if the Americans did not lead the world in the purchasing of Health Insurance.

 

[Slyfox696]

The feds admitted that it was a problem with their registration software.

Which would be a glitch, not a massive failure due to crappy programming and infrastructure. And since you've already admitted you have no idea what their programming is, you have no idea whether the glitch was due to crappy programming or not.

I was right. You were wrong.

:lamo

I don't even think you remember what we're discussing any more. I never said there wasn't glitches, in fact, I'm sure there will be more. That happens when you're rolling out software like this. It happens to every company, including those whose livelihoods depend on software like Apple and Microsoft. Furthermore, I don't believe I ever said it WASN'T crappy programming or infrastructure, merely that you had no idea what you were talking about and were simply injecting politics into the situation because you wanted to believe anything associated with the legislation you do not like is crappy.

But your original claim, the one I took issue with, was the site was a flop due to crappy programming and infrastructure. A technical glitch with registration software on the Ohio exchange site does not make a website crash. With the credentials you claim to have, you should know this.

You were not right. You just happened to find an article which mentions a glitch, but which also very clearly stated the problems had much to do with the heavy traffic to the site.

If you're not man enough to admit it then that just means you're a typical lefty, so no harm/no foul.

If I'm ever wrong, I have no problem admitting it. Perhaps you could do the same. You made a statement saying the programming and infrastructure was crap. You later admitted you have no idea what the programming and infrastructure is like. You made a faulty claim you cannot substantiate in any way, do you admit this?

 

[Papa bull]

Which would be a glitch, not a massive failure due to crappy programming and infrastructure.

I see. Maybe you just don't know the definition of "glitch".

glitch (glch)
n.
1. A minor malfunction, mishap, or technical problem; a snag: a computer glitch; a navigational glitch; a glitch in the negotiations.

The key here is MINOR. A glitch is when you input something it gives a weird output that doesn't stop you from going forward. A glitch is that if you hit the escape key you exit the program unexpectedly.

Coding errors that keep anyone from using the software isn't a "glitch". An endless loop in a program that everyone encounters and locks it up as soon as they open it isn't a "glitch".

There are a bunch of server side scripting languages that could have been used and you don't have to know which one it is to know that whatever methodology they used wasn't very well thought out and wasn't very well tested. Whether it was Perl, ASP, JAVA, Python, Ruby or God only knows what is utterly irrelevant. The fact that their design is failing so miserably is what's relevant.

It was obvious to me that the problem with the security questions not being displayed wasn't due to traffic. The traffic was handled in the queuing system. And now the Fed actually admitted it. You remind me of one of the clerks that used to work at one of my old workplaces. She didn't know the difference between a printer jam and a coding error. After two decades of coding and having plenty of coding errors to debug, I know them when I see them. I don't even know why I'm arguing this with you. You clearly don't know your ass from a hole in the ground about IS/IT and are just being a good Obama apologist and going on the offensive because you see what you consider to be criticism of "The One". The only thing that's missing is that you failed to call me a racist.

 

[Slyfox696]

I see. Maybe you just don't know the definition of "glitch".

I do, actually. Which is why I'm correcting you.

The key here is MINOR. A glitch is when you input something it gives a weird output that doesn't stop you from going forward.

Nonsense. One misspelled word can cause an entire page to error. That wouldn't be a flop or crappy programming, but rather a simple misspelled word, easily correctable.

Coding errors that keep anyone from using the software isn't a "glitch".

Of course it can be. This is seen all the time, particularly in gaming software. Seriously, what are you talking about? I very seriously have to question the credentials you keep trying to make people believe you have.

An endless loop in a program that everyone encounters and locks it up as soon as they open it isn't a "glitch".

But that's not what happened, even from the article you cited. The traffic load, as mentioned in your article, was what was keeping people from the site. Again, I seriously question the credentials you keep saying you have.

There are a bunch of server side scripting languages that could have been used and you don't have to know which one it is to know that whatever methodology they used wasn't very well thought out and wasn't very well tested. Whether it was Perl, ASP, JAVA, Python, Ruby or God only knows what is utterly irrelevant.

The fact you have no idea what they are using is exactly my point. You have ZERO idea what you're talking about. That's not an insult, that's a fact, one you admit.

You have no idea what they did, and you have no idea of how they coded. Thus, for you to say the problems were the result of crappy programming and infrastructure, is ridiculous, given the fact you clearly don't have any idea. You admit your ignorance, and yet still criticize it anyways.

The fact that their design is failing so miserably is what's relevant.

But it's not failing miserably. Millions of people over the last few days have visited this site(s). Once more, your political bias is getting in the way of objectivity.

I don't even know why I'm arguing this with you.

On this, we agree. Because you've already admitted you don't know what they've done, and yet, here you are still arguing it was done poorly. I don't know why you are arguing this either.

You clearly don't know your ass from a hole in the ground about IS/IT

You keep saying that, but only one person here is making claims, despite their admitted ignorance. That would be you, by the way.

and are just being a good Obama apologist and going on the offensive because you see what you consider to be criticism of "The One". The only thing that's missing is that you failed to call me a racist.

:lamo This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're injecting politics, again, where it has no place. This has NOTHING to do with Obama and has nothing to do with the exchanges. Do you really think Obama coded these website applications? Of course not.

Your bias is obvious. You've admitted your ignorance, so why are you still arguing this?

 

[Papa bull]

It isn't a "spelling error" when you're coding. It is a programming error. And the fact there is an error isn't the inexcusable part. The fact that the error was so obvious and so critical and didn't get caught and corrected in pre-go-live testing is the inexcusable part. It was an excellent example of how NOT to do a project launch.

 

[Slyfox696]

It isn't a "spelling error" when you're coding. It is a programming error.

But a spelling error can lead to the error, and a simple spelling mistake has happened to anyone who has ever done any coding. It doesn't make the entire code a flop when it happens.

And the fact there is an error isn't the inexcusable part. The fact that the error was so obvious and so critical and didn't get caught

And what error was it which was so obvious and critical? What were the conditions which caused the error? What other factors played into the software which caused the error?

You don't have any idea. That's my point.

It was an excellent example of how NOT to do a project launch.

The millions of people who have visited clearly disagree. Issues during times of incredibly high usage is not uncommon and certainly not during the launch (for example, iOS never has a smooth rollout due to high demand). So unless you have something specific you can point to which shows the issues were due to terrible programming and infrastructure, to me you're never going to seem like anything more than a partisan attacking something which has nothing to do with politics.

 

[Papa bull]

But a spelling error can lead to the error, and a simple spelling mistake has happened to anyone who has ever done any coding. It doesn't make the entire code a flop when it happens.

You don't know what you're talking about. In coding, there are no spelling errors. There are coding errors. The only syntax that matters isn't English.

And what error was it which was so obvious and critical? What were the conditions which caused the error? What other factors played into the software which caused the error?

You don't have any idea. That's my point.

Look, Einstein, you don't have to know whether the bus driver swerved because of a rabbit or a dog. The bus in the ditch tells you that the driver ran off the road. Something in the configuration/design/implementation was bad/wrong/incorrect. The fact that the feckin' web pages flat out didn't work - no error message - just failure staring you in the face without any way to get around it should have been the first clue for anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together. Having had a whole LOT of experience with this kind of stuff, I'm telling you you're pissing in the wind. No one with even a small amount of experience in any competent IS/IT department could call the launch of the marketplace anything but an unmitigated disaster. In the private sector, everyone with responsibility for that would have probably been fired already.

The millions of people who have visited clearly disagree.

And now in all your infinite wisdom you speak for the millions of people who have visited. Well, I'm one of them and I know quite a few others that think that it was one hell of a flop. I'm sure they'll get their garbage software to work eventually but it was an embarrassment that in my state and some others, it just flat out didn't work.

How you can call that anything but a miserable failure and a perfect example of what a launch SHOULDN'T be like is beyond me. All I can figure is that you're so invested in being right that you can't admit the obvious even when it's beating you all about the head and neck.

 

[Slyfox696]

You don't know what you're talking about. In coding, there are no spelling errors. There are coding errors. The only syntax that matters isn't English.

Hold on...are you saying langauges doesn't use words? So you never use things like "class" or "function" or "string"? Let's say I create a function named "foobar" and when I call it in my code I type "fobar"...that would be a spelling mistake, a simple typographical error. Or heck, what if we write "funtion", that would also be a spelling mistake. That would not be a massive flop of code, like you claimed, and with a simple correction of spelling, the code would (hypothetically) work.

Look, Einstein, you don't have to know whether the bus driver swerved because of a rabbit or a dog. The bus in the ditch tells you that the driver ran off the road.

But I also know he could have been drunk. If he swerved because of a child running out in the middle of the road (true story), then it was a situation where it wasn't a bad driver which caused the bus to swerve. But if the driver is completely drunk, and the bus swerves for no reason, then it would be the result of a bad driver.

So, Einstein Jr., your example has allowed me to illustrate my point wonderfully. All you know is the bus swerved. You have ZERO idea why, by your own admittance. For you to ignorantly criticize the bus driver as being drunk, when he may simply have been trying to avoid the child, is ridiculous. And that's what I am trying to get you to understand.

The fact that the feckin' web pages flat out didn't work - no error message - just failure staring you in the face without any way to get around it should have been the first clue for anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together.

You've said this before and ignored it when I addressed it. What error message is the website supposed to throw at the end user? The site says there is a problem and tells them an alternate way to deal with it. What exactly are you claiming should happen?

Having had a whole LOT of experience with this kind of stuff

The more you post, the less I believe you played any real part in what you're trying to pass yourself off as.

In the private sector, everyone with responsibility for that would have probably been fired already.

That's ridiculous. Websites introducing new features experience hiccups all the time, and that's without the added pressure of serving millions of people. The more you speak on this, the less I believe you are who you are trying to pass yourself off as.

And now in all your infinite wisdom you speak for the millions of people who have visited.

No, I'm illustrating the fact the site has obviously worked for millions of people.

How you can call that anything but a miserable failure and a perfect example of what a launch SHOULDN'T be like is beyond me.

Because I'm not discussing this from a politically biased perspective, whereas I'm quite confident you are.

 

[Papa bull]

....

Look, I didn't even bother reading your drivel this time. I know it's going to be the same old same old and you don't know what the f*** you are talking about and it's not possible to reason with you. If it wrecks your world to admit that the websites have been a huge flop, then live in whatever fanatasy land you want to live in. Meanwhile back in the real world, the Ohio site is STILL not working. At least they got the security question problems fixed and at least now you get an error message that the system is unavailable once you go through all the hassle of trying to sign up and get an account created.

FAIL. Not a glitch. It's a FAIL. At least to people in the real world. Hope the weather is nice in La La land for you. Bye.

 

[Papa bull]

p.s. Just got a new error message. While all answers to the security questions were unique, the code is such crap that it's still giving an error message:

Please note that two or more answers to the security questions cannot be the same. You must provide distinct answers to the chosen security questions.

Please wait a few moments and try again.

Heads would be rolling if this was in the private sector. Seriously. It's not just bad. It's embarrasingly bad. Incredibly bad. It's double face-palm bad.

 

[Slyfox696]

Look, I didn't even bother reading your drivel this time.

I seriously doubt that. I think you just know you've been painted into a corner and you cannot escape from the fact you made a statement you admit was based on ignorance, and you likely did it for politically biased reasons. What is amazing to me is after all the times you've insulted me for not admitting I'm wrong (when I clearly am not, as you have already acknowledged), you still cannot admit you are arguing a position you know to have no evidence. What I find even more amazing is the fact you very well COULD be right, it COULD be crappy programming and infrastructure and yet, the point is you have no idea what the programming and infrastructure is like, so why you continue to insist it is the problem is beyond me.

At the end of the day, you made a clearly biased statement, and instead of simply owning up to it, we've now spent numerous posts back and forth to the point you cannot even defend the things you are saying anymore. Simply admit what we both knew long ago, which is you made a statement based on politics, not any evidence of fact.

 

[Papa bull]

I seriously doubt that. I think you just know you've been painted into a corner and you cannot escape from the fact you made a statement you admit was based on ignorance, and you likely did it for politically biased reasons. What is amazing to me is after all the times you've insulted me for not admitting I'm wrong (when I clearly am not, as you have already acknowledged), you still cannot admit you are arguing a position you know to have no evidence. What I find even more amazing is the fact you very well COULD be right, it COULD be crappy programming and infrastructure and yet, the point is you have no idea what the programming and infrastructure is like, so why you continue to insist it is the problem is beyond me.

At the end of the day, you made a clearly biased statement, and instead of simply owning up to it, we've now spent numerous posts back and forth to the point you cannot even defend the things you are saying anymore. Simply admit what we both knew long ago, which is you made a statement based on politics, not any evidence of fact.

The sort of errors we saw should never be seen in a production environment. It's crappy programming. Trust me. Worse, though... it was crappy testing. Programs are going to have errors but the obvious ones should be caught during testing and corrected. This was really bad and it's nuts that you're still arguing about it.

 

[Slyfox696]

The sort of errors we saw should never be seen in a production environment.

:lamo

You've spent several posts saying you haven't seen any error messages. I believe this is a PERFECT example of your unwillingness to accept the fact you made a statement born out of political bias. Furthermore, we see errors in production environments all the time, significant ones. For you to say such a thing suggests to me your knowledge on this subject is far from trustworthy and you are simply trying to pass yourself off as an authority to avoid admitting you made a statement from bias.

It's crappy programming. Trust me.

No. Because you've said programming doesn't use the English language, that simple spelling mistakes mean terrible programming, that errors on a web page should throw debug messages to users, etc. You've said NOTHING which would elicit any level of trust from me on your knowledge.

This was really bad and it's nuts that you're still arguing about it.

I'm not arguing about it, YOU'RE arguing about something you have no knowledge of, a fact you've admitted. I'm simply pointing out the fact you don't know what you're talking about, as you've already admitted.

 

[Comunitee]

The sort of errors we saw should never be seen in a production environment.

You mean like in... the auto industry, before the federal government had to take it over?

:roll:

 

[Papa bull]

You mean like in... the auto industry, before the federal government had to take it over?

:roll:

Well, if they released a line of cars that no one could test drive because they wouldn't start and didn't have tires, then yeah. Like that.

 

[274ina]

Your shtick is clown-like. People believe they are mandated to purchase insurance and are wanting to know how much more it will cost them next year.

As for what "looks like success" to you, the law itself looks like success to you, even as Bill Clinton points out how it harms middle and lower class families, is "bad policy," and is "obviously not fair."

But that's because you consider successful not what helps middle and lower class Americans, but what you can count as a Democrat victory.

The middle class is gone. Sold to extinction by the rich and bill Clinton.


And the ACA gets HC to the poor, except in non-expansion states run by the tea party puppets of the mega rich.

 

[274ina]

2.8 million "hits" doesn't mean 2.8 million people tried to sign up. In reality what it probably means is 200,000 people tried a dozen times and gave up. It's still broken, by the way. Notice there weren't any numbers on the number of signups in Ohio? Notice that the federal officials declined to say how many people signed up in Ohio (while they were happy to do so for states that actually got some signups)? Notice that?

Here you go. Put this on and don't say I never gave you anything.

Its not hits. Its 2.8 million trying to sign up. Got it ?

 

[Neomalthusian]

The middle class is gone. Sold to extinction by the rich and bill Clinton.

"The middle class is gone?" Haha, no, there are tons of people earning every level of income. You can't distract from the fact you are promoting policies that **** over the middle class by pretending the middle class all of a sudden does not exist. Nice try though.

And by the way, Clinton's Treasury Secretary was Obama's chief economic advisor and his favorite to chair the Federal Reserve. And Obama just loves the monetary policies championed by his predecessor. They're all the same, and you look like a fool pretending they aren't.

And the ACA gets HC to the poor, except in non-expansion states run by the tea party puppets of the mega rich.

The poor could have signed up for Medicaid before the ACA came along. The ACA has a family glitch that affects people all the way up to 400% FPL, has cliffs along the way, and lets all sorts of otherwise Medicaid-eligible folks slip through the cracks, because it was hasty, mistake-ridden, insurance industry lobbyist-crafted fist-**** of a law.