3 ms·

> What the government really needs to do is adopt newer software that will allow for better tracking of what needs repairs, what has been repaired, when somethi

> What the government really needs to do is adopt newer software that will allow for better tracking of what needs repairs, what has been repaired, when something was last inspected, what needs inspection, and repair reporting tools. May I ask what the point of that would be? It's not like figuring out what's broken is a hard task. This sounds like it would drive up infrastructure cost even more than it already is.

losteric 11y ago
That's like saying the software world don't need issue trackers/scrum boards/todo lists because it's easy for devs to figure out bugs... City projects operate at scales beyond most companies... Coordination is kinda important for a decentralized organization running multiple billion dollar projects that impact thousands upon thousands of shareholders and consumers.
- ams6110 11y ago
  Managing these kinds of projects doesn't need sophisticated software (not that software is a bad thing, in itself). It needs competent managers. Most city managers are political appointments, selected to meet some arbitrary diversity quotas, etc. and are not the most competent person available (often far from it).
  - DrScump 11y ago
    <Managing these kinds of projects doesn't need sophisticated software (not that software is a bad thing, in itself). It needs competent managers.> Indeed. California state and local governments, for example, are notoriously horrible at large software system procurement and installation, routinely paying full retail for unsuitable new infrastructure that never works and is tossed out completely, with the procurement process restarted from scratch by the next appointee(s). Only some of these cases are reported about in the media with any degree of scope or accuracy.
  - losteric 11y ago
    It's a little of A and a little of B... We need competent people to manage the system, but we also need systems that give greater transparency into the state of the city. As the parent poster pointed out, it's pretty common for low-level managers not to know about overlapping work in other departments... or for higher level managers to get data that's been sanitized by several levels of management. Even better would be giving citizens access to at least some of the data, making sure the right decisions are being made.
- the_mitsuhiko 11y ago
  > That's like saying the software world don't need issue trackers/scrum boards/todo lists because it's easy for devs to figure out bugs... I am not familiar with how infrastructure is managed in the states but over here responsibilities for infrastructure is generally given to specific departments and they themselves generally have an understanding and a system to manage that. The idea that you can roll in their and introduce new software to improve that management is naive at best and dangerous at worst. The main problem infrastructure has in the states is that no maintenance is performed until it's completely broken and then it comes in very expensive. Also there is just too much decentralisation to maintain a lot of the infrastructure there.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
vlehto 11y ago
I've been in construction and it's surprisingly common that one company tears street up for sewers and then patch it up. Then a week later, another subcontractor tears up the exact same spot for gas line repair. Both instances scheduled months in advance. I don't know if you really need software for it. And maybe hydraulic excavators are just too cheap for anybody to mind stuff like this. EDIT: even more common is this "oh this gas line looks really corroded. But I guess we just throw dirt on it as we finish."

losteric 11y ago

That's like saying the software world don't need issue trackers/scrum boards/todo lists because it's easy for devs to figure out bugs... City projects operate at scales beyond most companies... Coordination is kinda important for a decentralized organization running multiple billion dollar projects that impact thousands upon thousands of shareholders and consumers.

ams6110 11y ago
Managing these kinds of projects doesn't need sophisticated software (not that software is a bad thing, in itself). It needs competent managers. Most city managers are political appointments, selected to meet some arbitrary diversity quotas, etc. and are not the most competent person available (often far from it).
- DrScump 11y ago
  <Managing these kinds of projects doesn't need sophisticated software (not that software is a bad thing, in itself). It needs competent managers.> Indeed. California state and local governments, for example, are notoriously horrible at large software system procurement and installation, routinely paying full retail for unsuitable new infrastructure that never works and is tossed out completely, with the procurement process restarted from scratch by the next appointee(s). Only some of these cases are reported about in the media with any degree of scope or accuracy.
- losteric 11y ago
  It's a little of A and a little of B... We need competent people to manage the system, but we also need systems that give greater transparency into the state of the city. As the parent poster pointed out, it's pretty common for low-level managers not to know about overlapping work in other departments... or for higher level managers to get data that's been sanitized by several levels of management. Even better would be giving citizens access to at least some of the data, making sure the right decisions are being made.
the_mitsuhiko 11y ago
> That's like saying the software world don't need issue trackers/scrum boards/todo lists because it's easy for devs to figure out bugs... I am not familiar with how infrastructure is managed in the states but over here responsibilities for infrastructure is generally given to specific departments and they themselves generally have an understanding and a system to manage that. The idea that you can roll in their and introduce new software to improve that management is naive at best and dangerous at worst. The main problem infrastructure has in the states is that no maintenance is performed until it's completely broken and then it comes in very expensive. Also there is just too much decentralisation to maintain a lot of the infrastructure there.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

vlehto 11y ago

I've been in construction and it's surprisingly common that one company tears street up for sewers and then patch it up. Then a week later, another subcontractor tears up the exact same spot for gas line repair. Both instances scheduled months in advance. I don't know if you really need software for it. And maybe hydraulic excavators are just too cheap for anybody to mind stuff like this. EDIT: even more common is this "oh this gas line looks really corroded. But I guess we just throw dirt on it as we finish."