8 ms·
Zero training? A single web server? No end users even touching the system till it's time for mission critical use? No frigging redirect of http->https? And it l
by meepmorp 14y ago
Zero training? A single web server? No end users even touching the system till it's time for mission critical use? No frigging redirect of http->https? And it looks like, as has happened more than once in my professional life, people outside of the management structure saw possible risks and were blown off by those in charge.
Even if you supported Romney, this has to give you some pause about the man's management skills and who he hired to run things.
- mrdodge 14y agoHe hired Microsoft and what sounds like a Microsoft Partner. No one gets fired for buying Microsoft.
- jvehent 14y agoOh yes, people do get fired for buying microsoft. Switch industries and you'll see. Or try spending 2 years building your company knowledge base into sharepoint and you'll see.
- niels_olson 14y agoSharePoint. Oh my head. When I saw us using that in the future ops center for Fukushima, it was the same feeling I had when I came back from sea duty and there was this thing called PowerPoint: I felt like they were asking me to put my brain in egg slicer. Giving a bunch of Marines with history degrees network and expecting them to understand version control is a step to far. Maybe in ten years. But the interface is sooooo bad, they'll never figure out how to use the one feature the system is intended to provide.
- lifeguard 14y agoAnd then a 18 yo REMF downloads all your secret classified documents and uploads them to the Internet.
- rhizome 14y agoDue to security policies ordered by a 48 yo REMF.
- niels_olson 14y agoIs there really an age gap in basic understanding of the Internet? I submit most 18 yo kids know as little as most 48 yo management types. Or 48 yo teachers, or 48 yo anything-other-than-hacker types. If there is any function that filters Internet literacy, it's self selection of certain people (mostly men) into CS/IT.
- rhizome 14y agoI'm referring to SIPRNet security policies that gave millions of its users access to the same "Top Secret" data, and where the DoD decision tree strongly correlates to seniority.
- lifeguard 14y agoI was referring to Private Bradley Manning and Sharepoint. To be fair, it took a few years to crack the MS file encryption. But now the world has wikileaks.
- sliverstorm 14y agoIs sharepoint generally objectionable, or simply unsuited to certain environments/workloads/userbases?
- modarts 14y agoSharePoint dev here. The problem is that Microsoft attempted to build the product to cover every environment/workload/userbase, and as a result fails pretty miserably at all of them. -You want a CMS? Use SharePoint! -How about site for delivering BI dashboards? Use SharePoint! -Large, mostly static public facing site? Use SharePoint! /Ugh
- unreal37 14y agoThat's true! I met Microsoft last year at the start of a large project for a client, and we were asking them to recommend a CMS to run in a .NET environment. They DID suggest Sharepoint. I laughed at them - "you are joking" I said. But they insisted, and we had to add Sharepoint to the shortlist of recommended CMS's just so that the client thought we considered everything their Microsoft salespeople were saying. But it was always a joke at that point.
- pyoung 14y agoGenerally Objectionable. I think it gets packaged with windows server and exchange server for free (or nearly free) which is probably the only reason people use it.
- chris_wot 14y agoWhen they do, they are extremely hard to dislodge!
- mturmon 14y agoSharepoint. Ugh. The mandated use of Sharepoint completely impeded communication on a multi-institution task I work on -- it was clunky when up, and often not up. The solution? Instead of the project administering Sharepoint, the admin was handed off to the division of the corporation that specializes in administering Sharepoint. (It's a very large company.) Now we have two-factor authentication and double logins to upload monthly status reports. And still nobody can actually communicate.
- smacktoward 14y agoExcept Mitt Romney, apparently!
- meepmorp 14y agoI meant the guys who he hired to take care of this stuff. Of course, after Tuesday, they're all looking for work now.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- acslater00 14y agoIt would give me more pause if Mitt Romney were involved personally in this sort of a project.
- mnicole 14y agoIt all trickles down, right?
- chris_wot 14y agoWhat, he didn't have any say in who he hired to make this work? The POTA doesn't actually personally work on many projects. He relies on people to get them done. If Romney couldn't get something as crucial as this right, then how the heck would he have gone running the country?
- furyofantares 14y agoPlanet of the Apes?
- jlgreco 14y agoIf there is anything a president's job isn't, it is to micromanage.
- anigbrowl 14y agoThat excuse covers just about anything. There's a big difference between micromanaging and verifying that your critical infrastructure is in place when you launch.
- DanBC 14y ago> Even if you supported Romney, this has to give you some pause about the man's management skills and who he hired to run things. Wait, what? There's a difference between people taking responsibility for what their staff do (thus, he should take responsibility for it) and people actually being responsible for what their staff do - especially if those staff are not staff but sub-contracted service providers.
- meepmorp 14y agoIf you don't hire people with adequate management skills to assess risk and take proactive steps to mitigate problems before they become dangerous to the mission, that's a failure at the highest level. Someone should've see this coming, or Romney clearly doesn't know how to delegate responsibility well.
- cobrausn 14y agoNow let's talk about Eric Holder, Obama, and a dead ATF agent. Something tells me you won't see it the same way.
- pyoung 14y agoThere is a magnitude of difference between the two. When you run a top heavy campaign to get elected and a critical project fails miserably, that falls on you. When you preside over a government that consists of a large number of relatively autonomous agencies and departments, and something goes wrong deep inside one of them, that falls on the project managers and department heads. To provide some scale, Romney's campaign employed approximately 500 staff. The Federal government employs more than 4 million.
- smsm42 14y agoEric Holder is not one of 4 million. Eric Holder is a personal selection. It's not like it is a random failure in some lowly backwater office. It is a failure and a coverup going to the very top - to people personally appointed by the President. So if you think people are responsible for a mobile app done for them - then they should be responsible for the mess in their administration too. And if we start counting how many projects endorsed, sponsored and initiated by the federal government failed recently, we could be here all night.