2 ms·

the saddest part about this type of stuff is the gov has software devs on staff not from consultants who are capable of "saving" gov sites. It is often a politi

the saddest part about this type of stuff is the gov has software devs on staff not from consultants who are capable of "saving" gov sites. It is often a political reason why things are they way they are(making everything 10x more convoluted for on staff devs)...and people profit more from having external contractors do the work. Parts of govt I'm in..contractors can use cloud services but our teams cannot, and we have to rely on internal systems and bureaucracy.. it's honestly all bullshit.

vippy 6y ago
The real challenge is getting the clearance and funding to work on things, and having enough staff developers within an agency, and technology leaders embedded in the business organization to help guide decision makers, etc. It's painful watching the government spend billions on commercial "off-the-shelf" software that requires years of "customization" (read: development) and, at the end of the day, the code isn't owned by the public, the platform company can put the screws to the government and charge more, prevent the government from accessing its own data without charging literally tens of millions of dollars, etc.
rablackburn 6y ago
Yep, one of the core value propositions for bringing in consultants is “they tell the exec what your staff already know. But because it cost a lot of money to have them say it people are more likely to listen” It’s a real service that provides real value. But companies can avoid the cost if they have a strong culture of trust internally (which is no simple thing to foster)
- moocowtruck 6y ago
  yep trust! exactly so little of it for whatever reason.. but somehow the contractor company we have to hound for the features they originally promised for that money get away with it, at least for enough years to get millions upon millions

2 ms·

the saddest part about this type of stuff is the gov has software devs on staff not from consultants who are capable of "saving" gov sites. It is often a politi

by moocowtruck 6y ago

vippy 6y ago
The real challenge is getting the clearance and funding to work on things, and having enough staff developers within an agency, and technology leaders embedded in the business organization to help guide decision makers, etc. It's painful watching the government spend billions on commercial "off-the-shelf" software that requires years of "customization" (read: development) and, at the end of the day, the code isn't owned by the public, the platform company can put the screws to the government and charge more, prevent the government from accessing its own data without charging literally tens of millions of dollars, etc.
rablackburn 6y ago
Yep, one of the core value propositions for bringing in consultants is “they tell the exec what your staff already know. But because it cost a lot of money to have them say it people are more likely to listen” It’s a real service that provides real value. But companies can avoid the cost if they have a strong culture of trust internally (which is no simple thing to foster)
- moocowtruck 6y ago
  yep trust! exactly so little of it for whatever reason.. but somehow the contractor company we have to hound for the features they originally promised for that money get away with it, at least for enough years to get millions upon millions