3 ms·

>If your public administration software sucks, you are voting the wrong people into public office. 1. It's very difficult for voters to know how much a given p

>If your public administration software sucks, you are voting the wrong people into public office. 1. It's very difficult for voters to know how much a given politician will prioritize digital services. 2. Even if a politician appears to have a good digital strategy, will they implement it well? 3. Most decisions about public admin software are made by bureaucrats who aren't elected anyways. 4. Most elections will likely have more important issues than public admin software. Although I agree it probably does have huge returns on investment.

afterburner 6y ago
> 1. It's very difficult for voters to know how much a given politician will prioritize digital services. Sort of but not really. Just keep voting in progressives that believe in government until the bureaucracy gets the message that it pays to be progressive and fix things.
tekdude 6y ago
I think the point being made is that public admin software has to be complicated because the underlying laws, policies, regulations, and procedures are complicated. Sometimes, they are over-complicated. And, sometimes this is deliberate (e.g., if applying for benefits is too complicated, fewer people will complete the process). If we elect politicians in favor of simplifying government operations, and they can actually succeed, then it follows that government software would naturally simplify as well. Note: This isn't necessarily the same as reducing government's role.
Hokusai 6y ago
> more important issues than public admin software In my experience, there is a correlation between parties that follow the science, invest in education, and create useful software. My critique is towards people that gives up and says that governments cannot make good software. And, that is false. It will never be perfect, like anything else, but it can be good.
- afarrell 6y ago
  > It will never be perfect, like anything else, but it can be good. As a US -> UK immigrant: 1. This is true. 2. This is made harder or easier by the complexity of the underlying abstractions it is trying to model. I suspect the software that the NHS has to calculate how much to charge medical patients is very simple.

afterburner 6y ago

> 1. It's very difficult for voters to know how much a given politician will prioritize digital services. Sort of but not really. Just keep voting in progressives that believe in government until the bureaucracy gets the message that it pays to be progressive and fix things.

tekdude 6y ago

I think the point being made is that public admin software has to be complicated because the underlying laws, policies, regulations, and procedures are complicated. Sometimes, they are over-complicated. And, sometimes this is deliberate (e.g., if applying for benefits is too complicated, fewer people will complete the process). If we elect politicians in favor of simplifying government operations, and they can actually succeed, then it follows that government software would naturally simplify as well. Note: This isn't necessarily the same as reducing government's role.

Hokusai 6y ago

> more important issues than public admin software In my experience, there is a correlation between parties that follow the science, invest in education, and create useful software. My critique is towards people that gives up and says that governments cannot make good software. And, that is false. It will never be perfect, like anything else, but it can be good.

afarrell 6y ago
> It will never be perfect, like anything else, but it can be good. As a US -> UK immigrant: 1. This is true. 2. This is made harder or easier by the complexity of the underlying abstractions it is trying to model. I suspect the software that the NHS has to calculate how much to charge medical patients is very simple.