3 ms·

Care to elaborate?

• 2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
  It's difficult to separate the issues with the programs that I have worked on and the industry as a whole but I will try. I get a sense that the govt pays $10 for $1 of work. The other $9 is lost to bloated outdated process. You often see these companies avoid investing in themselves unless they can charge it to the government. This culture extends to contracts as well. If the government doesn't pay for unit tests then they aren't getting unit tested software. Known bugs don't get fixed unless the government pays for it. The government can require static analysis but then not require the findings to be fixed. It's as if these companies treat the government as an adversary. There is little to no incentive to deliver a good product- just enough to pass the requirements, check a box, and dump it on the customer. We have known about this approach to software for decades- the Defense Innovation Board has been sounding the alarm about losing ground due to outdated software processes in the defense industry: https://media.defense.gov/2019/May/01/2002126691/-1/-1/0/SWAP%20FLYER.PDF https://media.defense.gov/2019/May/01/2002126691/-1/-1/0/SWA... I really like their suggestion to make software source code a deliverable. That way the government can own the code, build from source, apply security fixes, audit, etc.