4 ms·

So your solution to a problem that exists because there isn't enough capacity to go around is to compound that problem by having even less capacity?

nradov 2y ago
The federal government does too much. We could simply eliminate many of those agencies and save money for taxpayers, or redirect those resources to more important functions. There is excess capacity, it's just in the wrong places. As for IT functions, all of that should be centralized under the GSA with proper security controls. There's no benefit to having every agency maintain its own IT infrastructure. Most of those staff are redundant and could be laid off.
- notaustinpowers 2y ago
  I worry for having a centralized IT infrastructure as that now puts every single agency at risk from a single attack. No one would call a neighborhood "secure" if every home used the same key.
  - Jtsummers 2y ago
    It's getting centralized anyways, just not inside any federal agency. Instead they're outsourcing it to companies like MS and Google who provide hosted services. This gives the agency cover so long as they do their part (like making use of MFA, using encryption on email). Then they can offer a claim of making their best-effort and going with industry "standards" (standard as in common, not as in ISO, ANSI, or others).
  - metadat 2y ago
    This is worse than what's happening today: every agency IT department being underfunded and operating in an ad-hoc, non-uniform matter. This argument doesn't hold.
- acdha 2y ago
  > As for IT functions, all of that should be centralized under the GSA with proper security controls. There's no benefit to having every agency maintain its own IT infrastructure. Most of those staff are redundant and could be laid off. This works for email. Would you work at a company where you had to build and deploy apps on infrastructure controlled by someone in a different department and location, whose boss gave them the mandate to standardize as much as possible to reduce costs? (Hope you like Oracle…)
  - Uvix 2y ago
    That was your fairly typical on-premise corporate hosting. Things have gotten better with the cloud but it's still hardly a free-for-all, use-whatever-you-want-with-no-oversight situation.
    - acdha 2y ago
      Cloud environments helped, but the kind of massively centralized environment they’re talking about in the cloud work still tends to mean “get 4 levels of approvals and you can get a t3.medium using our AMI with Java 6”. My point is just that successful IT needs people who understand the mission and share your incentives – you can outsource email and other generic services but most people here work on things which aren’t one-size fits all.
  - nradov 2y ago
    Sure, I have worked at companies that manage their IT infrastructure that way. It's fine, way more efficient and secure than letting every department do their own thing.
- LamaOfRuin 2y ago
  Everyone agrees the government does too much of some stuff and not enough of other stuff. No one agrees on what belongs in which category.
- screcth 2y ago
  That would be extremely bureaucratic.
fleabagmange 2y ago
Omar a minimum we need to deduplicate insane degrees of replication. Why does virtually every government agency have dedicated law enforcement? Narrow it down, reallocate budget, eliminate the wasteful overhead. It’s not all or nothing here. We spend too much and get too little out of it.
- redserk 2y ago
  Law enforcement is incredibly difficult, especially with the number and types of laws on the books. You want multiple different law enforcement agencies so they can specialize based on the field of law they are in. Currency counterfeiting is a different set of laws than interstate financial fraud, which is a different set of laws than throwing a Snickers wrapper on the ground in Yosemite.
  - coldtea 2y ago
    >Currency counterfeiting is a different set of laws than interstate financial fraud Which is somewhat irrevant. Teams dealing with each can still share headquarters, IT resources, support stuff, cafeterias, and lots of other things.

nradov 2y ago

The federal government does too much. We could simply eliminate many of those agencies and save money for taxpayers, or redirect those resources to more important functions. There is excess capacity, it's just in the wrong places. As for IT functions, all of that should be centralized under the GSA with proper security controls. There's no benefit to having every agency maintain its own IT infrastructure. Most of those staff are redundant and could be laid off.

notaustinpowers 2y ago
I worry for having a centralized IT infrastructure as that now puts every single agency at risk from a single attack. No one would call a neighborhood "secure" if every home used the same key.
- Jtsummers 2y ago
  It's getting centralized anyways, just not inside any federal agency. Instead they're outsourcing it to companies like MS and Google who provide hosted services. This gives the agency cover so long as they do their part (like making use of MFA, using encryption on email). Then they can offer a claim of making their best-effort and going with industry "standards" (standard as in common, not as in ISO, ANSI, or others).
- metadat 2y ago
  This is worse than what's happening today: every agency IT department being underfunded and operating in an ad-hoc, non-uniform matter. This argument doesn't hold.
acdha 2y ago
> As for IT functions, all of that should be centralized under the GSA with proper security controls. There's no benefit to having every agency maintain its own IT infrastructure. Most of those staff are redundant and could be laid off. This works for email. Would you work at a company where you had to build and deploy apps on infrastructure controlled by someone in a different department and location, whose boss gave them the mandate to standardize as much as possible to reduce costs? (Hope you like Oracle…)
- Uvix 2y ago
  That was your fairly typical on-premise corporate hosting. Things have gotten better with the cloud but it's still hardly a free-for-all, use-whatever-you-want-with-no-oversight situation.
  - acdha 2y ago
    Cloud environments helped, but the kind of massively centralized environment they’re talking about in the cloud work still tends to mean “get 4 levels of approvals and you can get a t3.medium using our AMI with Java 6”. My point is just that successful IT needs people who understand the mission and share your incentives – you can outsource email and other generic services but most people here work on things which aren’t one-size fits all.
- nradov 2y ago
  Sure, I have worked at companies that manage their IT infrastructure that way. It's fine, way more efficient and secure than letting every department do their own thing.
LamaOfRuin 2y ago
Everyone agrees the government does too much of some stuff and not enough of other stuff. No one agrees on what belongs in which category.
screcth 2y ago
That would be extremely bureaucratic.

fleabagmange 2y ago

Omar a minimum we need to deduplicate insane degrees of replication. Why does virtually every government agency have dedicated law enforcement? Narrow it down, reallocate budget, eliminate the wasteful overhead. It’s not all or nothing here. We spend too much and get too little out of it.

redserk 2y ago
Law enforcement is incredibly difficult, especially with the number and types of laws on the books. You want multiple different law enforcement agencies so they can specialize based on the field of law they are in. Currency counterfeiting is a different set of laws than interstate financial fraud, which is a different set of laws than throwing a Snickers wrapper on the ground in Yosemite.
- coldtea 2y ago
  >Currency counterfeiting is a different set of laws than interstate financial fraud Which is somewhat irrevant. Teams dealing with each can still share headquarters, IT resources, support stuff, cafeterias, and lots of other things.