5 ms·

The causes behind this are truly more systemic than mere corruption, and actually pull at the very root of problems in Africa and many developing economies in t

by RyanZAG 14y ago

The causes behind this are truly more systemic than mere corruption, and actually pull at the very root of problems in Africa and many developing economies in the current tech environment. In USA/Europe/increasing in China and India, basic tech and internet projects are fairly well understood by the general public. The idea of wordpress, blogs, and even a basic understanding of the internet and modern technology are fairly prevalent. Even with corruption in a small Texan town, something like pushing through a Wordpress site for $15m would be impossible - there is an understanding of how a website is created and what constitutes a million dollar vs a thousand dollar technology project. I live in South Africa, so I see this every day: there is zero understanding by the majority of the population into any internet related projects. Our major new tech companies tend to boost up the Johannesburg Stock Exchange into incredible valuations before suddenly realizing that their business models are terrible. Most entrepreneurship in the country is focused on targeting townships - people who can barely afford to eat, let alone think about technology, and unsurprisingly, these companies turn to government grants or dissolve. These are all systemic problems from countries simply not being able to keep up with the rapidly accelerating technological developments - and I think it's going to be a massive problem in the future for any country not focusing on getting into the 'internet rush'. It should be clear to most of us on HN just how important these kind of tech innovations are going to be on the future of humanity.

jbail 14y ago
I've seen many millions of dollars spent on websites, logos, and webpage designs in the United States over the past decade. In many cases, there was clearly A LOT of profit built into the price. $15 million is no doubt a lot for a Wordpress site. But, I've seen $6 million spent on a logo. Is that more or less ridiculous?
- ajross 14y ago
  Surely it's no less ridiculous. But, to step on some touchy ground here... The executives who approved the logo were very well-compensated tech industry leaders. And if they made a dumb decision then they deserved the finacial pain and community scorn they deserved. Shame on them. But the folks who paid for the blog were mid-level government officials in a comparatively impoverished nation with little local tech leadership or expertise to draw on. They got duped. Our moral compass wants to draw different conclusions here. Which is the truth? Damned if I know.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - fleitz 14y ago
    It's really impossible to tell without knowing more details, given how many times gov't clients change requirements it's easily possible that they were just wasting time. Also speaking of lots of money for wordpress sites, what did AOL pay for Techcrunch?
    - mercurial 14y ago
      Apples and oranges. AOL was not buying design and developer time. They were buying talent and eyeballs.
    - offordscott 14y ago
      I agree. There could have been many other projects tied into the scope of work.
  - sunir 14y ago
    If you sign the checks, you're still responsible.
- mac1175 14y ago
  I work for a city agency in the US. I saw and heard such stories of insane tax payers' money used for affordable technology like adding responsive design to a website (talking close to $1m).
  - gamblor956 14y ago
    Responsive design for a government website, means, among other things, that it must be handicap-accessible and conform to screenreader guidelines, be viewable on browsers of constituents who may not have purchased a computer in the past decade (i.e., IE6), and also compatible with modern browsers. This is a lot of work, especially making a website that is screenreader-accessible or works in IE6. You don't get to just abandon those visitors, like so many websites do today. Those people have just as much a right to access a functional government web page as people using modern browsers.
    - Fzznik 14y ago
      I just checked the site in question and it is not responsive. Being able to conform to screenreaders and older browsers is not difficult by any means and certainly shouldn't cost anywhere near even 1% of what we're talking about here. In my humble opinion.
- robin_reala 14y ago
  The $6 million for a logo was probably many months of work by a well-respected agency for a complete branding package. Not to say that’s not expensive, but when you look at it as a value proposition it could change your perception. $15 million for a WordPress theme and server is bad value by anyone’s standards.
ocirion 14y ago
Rather than the cause being something other than corruption, I think this is in addition to corruption. Without corruption all the way to the very core of the government (as it is in SA), we wouldn't have situations such as this. The lowest, cost effective tender would have been chosen after following proper due diligence. In this case the due diligence would mean asking experts (of which there are many in SA) which, combined with the cost of the project, would still have cost a fraction of the R140m.
jkuria 14y ago
Hi RyanZAG I'd like to get in touch with you? How may I do this? my email is jkuria [at] gmail
wsc981 14y ago
Personally I tend to think this is corruption though. Stuff like this even happens quite often in the developed world. Some official grants a job to a friend of him and perhaps the profits are shared somehow. A recent example from the Netherlands also involving a Wordpress site (translated to English): http://bit.ly/W0dUkt http://bit.ly/W0dUkt
- hackmiester 14y ago
  The phrase "Un-fucking-believable" here was extremely jarring, especially since "fucking" was in the original text! Very interesting.
bmmayer1 14y ago
I lived in South Africa and I wrote my thesis specifically on post-apartheid race politics. There is an added problem here, which is the extent of corruption in so-called Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) programs. The contractor here is a black-owned business, which is all well and good, but such companies are often a front for thinly veiled corruption where connected "entrepreneurs" can bleed taxpayers of millions of rand in the name of social progress. Unfortunately, whereas BEE has created some wealthy black businessmen, it has done almost nothing to solve abject poverty among blacks in South Africa, and the program has been captured to an absurd degree. It also can't be criticized, and any challenge to it is denounced as racist. See the last line of this article: "Ntsele told the newspaper opposition parties had an agenda against black businessmen and that the website’s cost was fair."

by RyanZAG 14y ago

jbail 14y ago

I've seen many millions of dollars spent on websites, logos, and webpage designs in the United States over the past decade. In many cases, there was clearly A LOT of profit built into the price. $15 million is no doubt a lot for a Wordpress site. But, I've seen $6 million spent on a logo. Is that more or less ridiculous?

ajross 14y ago
Surely it's no less ridiculous. But, to step on some touchy ground here... The executives who approved the logo were very well-compensated tech industry leaders. And if they made a dumb decision then they deserved the finacial pain and community scorn they deserved. Shame on them. But the folks who paid for the blog were mid-level government officials in a comparatively impoverished nation with little local tech leadership or expertise to draw on. They got duped. Our moral compass wants to draw different conclusions here. Which is the truth? Damned if I know.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- fleitz 14y ago
  It's really impossible to tell without knowing more details, given how many times gov't clients change requirements it's easily possible that they were just wasting time. Also speaking of lots of money for wordpress sites, what did AOL pay for Techcrunch?
  - mercurial 14y ago
    Apples and oranges. AOL was not buying design and developer time. They were buying talent and eyeballs.
  - offordscott 14y ago
    I agree. There could have been many other projects tied into the scope of work.
- sunir 14y ago
  If you sign the checks, you're still responsible.
mac1175 14y ago
I work for a city agency in the US. I saw and heard such stories of insane tax payers' money used for affordable technology like adding responsive design to a website (talking close to $1m).
- gamblor956 14y ago
  Responsive design for a government website, means, among other things, that it must be handicap-accessible and conform to screenreader guidelines, be viewable on browsers of constituents who may not have purchased a computer in the past decade (i.e., IE6), and also compatible with modern browsers. This is a lot of work, especially making a website that is screenreader-accessible or works in IE6. You don't get to just abandon those visitors, like so many websites do today. Those people have just as much a right to access a functional government web page as people using modern browsers.
  - Fzznik 14y ago
    I just checked the site in question and it is not responsive. Being able to conform to screenreaders and older browsers is not difficult by any means and certainly shouldn't cost anywhere near even 1% of what we're talking about here. In my humble opinion.
robin_reala 14y ago
The $6 million for a logo was probably many months of work by a well-respected agency for a complete branding package. Not to say that’s not expensive, but when you look at it as a value proposition it could change your perception. $15 million for a WordPress theme and server is bad value by anyone’s standards.

ocirion 14y ago

Rather than the cause being something other than corruption, I think this is in addition to corruption. Without corruption all the way to the very core of the government (as it is in SA), we wouldn't have situations such as this. The lowest, cost effective tender would have been chosen after following proper due diligence. In this case the due diligence would mean asking experts (of which there are many in SA) which, combined with the cost of the project, would still have cost a fraction of the R140m.

jkuria 14y ago

Hi RyanZAG I'd like to get in touch with you? How may I do this? my email is jkuria [at] gmail

wsc981 14y ago

Personally I tend to think this is corruption though. Stuff like this even happens quite often in the developed world. Some official grants a job to a friend of him and perhaps the profits are shared somehow. A recent example from the Netherlands also involving a Wordpress site (translated to English): http://bit.ly/W0dUkt http://bit.ly/W0dUkt

hackmiester 14y ago
The phrase "Un-fucking-believable" here was extremely jarring, especially since "fucking" was in the original text! Very interesting.

bmmayer1 14y ago

I lived in South Africa and I wrote my thesis specifically on post-apartheid race politics. There is an added problem here, which is the extent of corruption in so-called Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) programs. The contractor here is a black-owned business, which is all well and good, but such companies are often a front for thinly veiled corruption where connected "entrepreneurs" can bleed taxpayers of millions of rand in the name of social progress. Unfortunately, whereas BEE has created some wealthy black businessmen, it has done almost nothing to solve abject poverty among blacks in South Africa, and the program has been captured to an absurd degree. It also can't be criticized, and any challenge to it is denounced as racist. See the last line of this article: "Ntsele told the newspaper opposition parties had an agenda against black businessmen and that the website’s cost was fair."