Chef Jim vs. OC in Buffalo

[OCinBuffalo]

Silly Chef Jim does not see, how relative the word "up" can be.

 

I can put lettuce upon a plate, then say "your dinner is up" without debate.

 

Is it what you asked for, no, but I can call it "up", and go.

 

Any child can put up a front end, that's no trouble, the troubles lie in the back end, they pop your idiot bubble.

 

If you define "site" as merely HTML, then of course anyone can make that run well.

 

Chef sees the whole system as though it's some small site, and makes us pros say: "you're not doing it right".

 

To sum it up as plain as this stuff is able, the middle tier architecture must be put on the table.

 

What does the user interface matter, if the app layer logic is nothing but chatter?

 

"Fixing a website is a job for a kid", if that's all there is, why'd this die like it did?

 

Half the answer depends on proper methodology, the other half might as well lie in child psychology.

 

The trouble that can't be fixed by Sebelius retirement? The White House plays games with the the system's requirements.

 

Above all nonsense we build for the user, anything else is the work of a loser.

 

But the White House demanded they hide price away. Idiocy like this won't change.....

 

not between Nov. 30th...

 

...and today.

Edited November 13, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

Awww isn't this cute. Sorry but you have not given me a reason why you think the site will not be up and functioning by the deadline. You've explained in your cute little rhyming game why it's not functioning now but that wasn't the original question posed to us was it. Answer the question in three rhyms or less.

[OCinBuffalo]

VERSE:

 

It's easy to see Chef Jims's reading comprehension, is just as pathetic as his "IT has nothing to do with it" conception.

When something stays broken, how can we call that a fix? Since "Barry has spoken"? Wait, you believe in his tricks?

For any problem we need definition. Without it we head straight to perdition.

Since the problem is the website being up by the 1st, what about it's design says it's no longer the worst?

 

I spoke speficially and in detail to this issue, The Valley Kids can't fix this with a "feminine tissue".

You can clean it up here, shave a bit there, and wipe it down nicely, but the infection of bad webservices is the problem precisely.

The issues I'm raising you soon will see, aren't fixable in 20 weeks, never mind 3.

 

CHORUS:

 

Chef Jim is a tool, a tiny little tool, cause aruging with me about this is the province of the fool.

Chef Jim is a tool, a tiny little tool, cause aruging with me about this is the province of the fool.

 

Chef Jim has no chance, to win this silly game.

But he's trying his best and defending his screen name.

 

 

VERSE:

 

When one wants a system that's brimming with utility, one does not load it down with improbability.

Far too many web services firing just right, is the ONLY way it works, if its 3am, tonight.

Otherwise it hangs and users say: "Goddammit!". "What the F is this? Were they born on this planet?"

Upon 50+ external servers this system has dependency, while a real desinger knows this as an idiot's tendency.

 

Only dumb Chefs thinks these problems are solved, by pretty pictures and the existing people involved.

Again I demand we review the words "it works", as that could mean anything to these incompetent jerks.

Show me a button and I will click it, then show me a passing test case, not another help-desk ticket.

 

CHORUS

 

And the problem most nefarious? Chef has no clue about it, and that's hilarious!

They say "it works", and Dolt Chef says "OK"! Meanwhile the hacker takes his info away.

This is going to happen will shocking regularity, the risk to the data is of major severity.

Even with a bunch of Silicon Valley infusion, no way they keep the system from black hat intrusion.

 

Not when the schedule is in such a short frame, this Turkey Day brings liberals nothing but pain.

A big system like this requires at least 3 months to be tested. Changing code during that time, should get you arrested.

But that is the plan as we are told. This gives the term "hotfix" new meaning, beyond bold.

 

CHORUS

 

And given all this there sits Chef with his link.

 

Kinda pathetic, don't you think?

 

:lol: :lol: , :lol:

Edited November 14, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

The President has all the power and money at his disposal to make sure this thing works and works as promised by the deadline. He can and will summon all the IT experts to get this done to save his ass, his party's ass and his legacy's ass. Just wait, you'll see.

Edited November 14, 2013 by Chef Jim

[OCinBuffalo]

Putting up a website that does some things right, does not equal "working", it's not "doing it right".

What "I will see" is what I've seen before in this situation, panic always leads to wild desperation.

 

Get 9 women pregnant, and say it's sublime, but can they give you a baby in 1 month's time?

The answer is no, you silly little twit. You would've seen that, had you thought a bit.

This is the part that few seem to get, "a brute force of resources" is always a bad bet.

 

The trouble has been exactly as I've stated, bad design, incompetence and White House-children related.

No huge dollar amount of programming muscle, can fix something based on a socialist hustle.

 

They should make it work like it was an Ebay, where you see what you're paying, see it right away.

But that means many people won't enroll, cause it involves bending over and very thick pole.

 

So once again "requirements shall rule the day", funny, that makes 4 times I've said that today.

 

Unless the reqs change, and I mean lickety split,

this site stays deranged, a real piece of sh_it.

 

The point you should have made, but I will instead, is maybe a re-design can aid, you chucklehead.

If they cut the 50+ sessions in browser cache, perhaps they get it done: maybe it saves their ass.

 

But, I would have countered, as I've already stated, the sessions they have are political requirement-related.

So we can talk about programmers but the root cause? Ideology. Does that give anyone pause?

 

Unless they start over using standard e-commerce design, they'll never get this done, it'll neve be "fine".

It's been said more times than there is clover, there's "meeting the spec", then there's "trying to get over".

 

A huge unfixed problem lies in the integration code, the insurance companies can't produce what the website is owed.

So even if they had every ace developer in Cali, they are still going to take it up the old Hershey alley.

 

The insurance company data is an absolute must, otherwise your whole argument goes bust.

The insurance company insider, right here, says no chance. It's the Backend, as I said...

 

...now Chef puppet? Dance!

 

Edited November 15, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

I'm not a big poetry guy (sorry, I've got a set of balls) so I really didn't read your post. I really don't have to because it probably says something like: I'm an expert, blah, blah, blah, you're a fool to think blah, blah, blah, and I know because I'm an expert blah, blah, blah.

 

So I will state my position that I have had all along. Obama is mighty and was trained well by the Chicago politcal machine. That training consisits of doing what you're told, and if you don't do what you're told you will never work in your industry of choice again that is if you even live. He also has all the money that Treasury has to make this thing work. You put all those together along with this is his legacy, what he will have his name tied to for the rest of his life, He will make it work. I have faith in Him, you'll see.

[OCinBuffalo]

Fine, fine, fine.

 

Apparently I just need to kill Chef once and for all. The whole point of the rhymes was: if all I had to do is what I am about to? Chef is auto-crushed. I was trying to make it fair by ryhming. But, if we don't want it to be fair? Then fine.

 

In my link above(where it says "right here") then entire answer lies in the number 834. Want to know what that is? Here: http://www.dhcs.ca.g...Enrollment.aspx

 

Now, what is all this?

 

Well, if you care about the exact definition:

 

then it's the interface transport that has been standardized via HIPAA. Having a standardized transport is supposed to help, because then every system can comply...and should be: "compatible".

 

If you don't care, and want an analogy instead:

 

Your checks, if you still write them, have a standard format. And, practically every check in America follows the same format. If you look at somebody's else's checkbook, you know where everything is, and you could probably fill it out. This means that the transaction, you giving money to someone else, has a format that is absolutely standardized. The same is true for all. We all use the same transaction format.

 

Right now, 1(one) problem(of many) that absolutely means Healthcare.gove WILL NOT BE "up" or "working" in terms of the REAL definitions of those words?

 

The handshake between the Healthcare.gov, and the various insurance company servers in 39 states, CAN NOT support the standard transaction process, as designed, and will NOT be able to do this by Dec 1.

 

So, I win, Chef loses. This is ALL I need to win.

 

Need more? The reason I bolded 39 states and as designed? As the article(the "right here" line) says: they can do a few transactions, but, and here is where the "as designed" comes into play: they cannot manage these transactions in terms of the volume and within the scope(context) of so many companies all over the country.

 

This is due to DESIGN, and won't be fixed by coding. The DESIGN is flawed. Throwing hardware/Silicon Valley at the problem doesn't solve it either.

 

What SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE? These transactions should be done using a workflow engine, in a system that is completely separated from the website, and only has 3 simple messages moving between the 2 systems = "Transaction requested" and then "Transaction repsonse = Good" and "Transaction Response = FAIL + Reason why". Instead, they are keeping a session on the browser that is iniating and managing the entire transaction.

 

(EDIT: And, a butload of other transactions as well, because? They want to hide the price until the END!)

 

Hence, slow/crash. Especially when you are creating a geometric load on each browser and the server, by having each visitor to the website trying to establish a connection to every single server that has the data they need.

 

That means: throwing out the entire set of existing code, and starting all over with a new one, is the ONLY correct approach. That was never, ever going to be done by Nov. 30th or Dec. 1st or whenever, and it sure as hell wasn't going to be tested.

 

Never mind the load balancing and figuring out the hardware that matches....

 

I could go on and on.

 

I don't have to because, I win.

Edited November 15, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

Fine, fine, fine.

 

Apparently I just need to kill Chef once and for all. The whole point of the rhymes was: if all I had to do is what I am about to? Chef is auto-crushed. I was trying to make it fair by ryhming. But, if we don't want it to be fair? Then fine.

 

In my link above(where it says "right here") then entire answer lies in the number 834. Want to know what that is? Here: http://www.dhcs.ca.g...Enrollment.aspx

 

Now, what is all this?

 

Well, if you care about the exact definition:

 

then it's the interface transport that has been standardized via HIPAA. Having a standardized transport is supposed to help, because then every system can comply...and should be: "compatible".

 

If you don't care, and want an analogy instead:

 

Your checks, if you still write them, have a standard format. And, practically every check in America follows the same format. If you look at somebody's else's checkbook, you know where everything is, and you could probably fill it out. This means that the transaction, you giving money to someone else, has a format that is absolutely standardized. The same is true for all. We all use the same transaction format.

 

Right now, 1(one) problem(of many) that absolutely means Healthcare.gove WILL NOT BE "up" or "working" in terms of the REAL definitions of those words?

 

 

 

Well there's your problem right there Mr. I know IT better than anyone because I'm brilliant. You typed in the website address wrong. I hope you do a better job typing code in your "real" job...whatever that is.

[OCinBuffalo]

Chef? Typos now?

 

It's over. You know it. You've been running with Chicago politics and Hollywood $ and Silicon Valley muscle.....

 

none of which have to do with why major IT systems break, and what you do to fix them, which is central to the question we've been asked to answer.

 

Know it all? Nope. Know what I know? Yep.

 

I know how to build big systems, I've been doing this since I was in high school, as a programmer, and most of my career, I've been an architect, the cheif archictect, or the project manager.

 

I know exactly why this is failing. It's a matter of the White House foisting childish, unreasonable requirements on the contractor for political reasons, and the contract exacerbating that by responding with a childish, unreasonable design.

 

Thus, you can't fix this with $, or Silicon Valley resources, or Chicago politics.

 

None of those things know how to define proper requirements, or to create proper design, FOR THIS PROJECT. Those things only speak to execution. IF this was an execution problem, additonal programmers MIGHT help. However, it is a reqs/design problem. Adding more programmers to this problem solves nothing.

 

Not when the captain of the ship, the helmsman, and the navigator keep steering for the shoals.

 

So the question that remains: Who has been fired? No one. If the same people are going to stay in charge of the steerage, the ship still hits the rocks. It can be loaded down with Hollywood money, and Hollywood stars, and Chicago pols, but...it still hits the rocks.

 

But, as I said: this is your argument. It is weak, and hypothetical.

 

My argument is absolute and as empirical as it gets. You can't do no 834 transactions? Do don't get no "working" website.

Edited November 15, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

So you're admitting you know what you know but you don't know it all. I appreciate your honesty. But here's the thing, have you looked under the hood of this thing? Is there a possibility that someone, maybe just anyone, is a wee bit smarter than you and can figure out how to get this to work. That's the difference between you and me. You masturbate to pictures of yourself and would never ever admit that you could possibly be wrong. Me on the otherhand I have and unwavering optimism that this President will pull together a team of top IT people that know more than you, a Dream Team if you will, that will fix this for love of Him, country, and the Democratic party. I have faith. You have self love.

Edited November 15, 2013 by Chef Jim

[OCinBuffalo]

So you're admitting you know what you know but you don't know it all. I appreciate your honesty. But here's the thing, have you looked under the hood of this thing? Is there a possibility that someone, maybe just anyone, is a wee bit smarter than you and can figure out how to get this to work. That's the difference between you and me. You masturbate to pictures of yourself and would never ever admit that you could possibly be wrong. Me on the otherhand I have and unwavering optimism that this President will pull together a team of top IT people that know more than you, a Dream Team if you will, that will fix this for love of Him, country, and the Democratic party. I have faith. You have self love.

Yes, I've looked under the hood of this thing, and found: lots of bad things. One of the other things I know? How to run Firebug.https://getfirebug.com/

 

Now, the choice is yours: do you want me to show you what I've found under the hood? Warning: it involves IT...which, according to you: doesn't matter, but, we have to look under the hood, but IT doesn't matter, but, ....

 

Nice contradiction there skippy.

 

You are confusing me taking me seriously, with me taking my work seriously.

 

Ask yourself Chef: do you REALLY think I take myself seriously. Really? Is that the persona that's on display here, every single day? :lol: And, what do I, or my take on myself, have to do with 834s not working right? Nothing.

 

No. You require me to be incompetent in my work, so that you can be "right". I refuse to be incompetent for you Chef. Remember who you are talking to: I could still be in the Valley, doing my job, right now. I refuse to associate myself with self-involved, pseudo-Buddhists, who self-congratulate as often and as regularly as Muslims pray. I chose to leave, and I can choose to go back: whatever suits me.

 

This isn't about opinion. This is about my expert experience and knowledge. Sure, it's not absolutes either, there is always the "it depends" factor.

 

However, "it depends" means there are a fixed number of cases, and only one of them can be true. This isn't social science, where we throw out a thoery, never really back it up with anything, and keep applying for grants and getting them, becaue it's all based on opinion and/or weak correlation.

 

No. This is IT, and the fact that they can't get the 834s done IS looking under the hood. That means the design issues that I(because other people did it first) found using Firebug, in the client layer, have now been confirmed in the back end.

 

That is absolute. It's the only case that fits. Your opinion, or that of anyone else in my business, or outside of it, is irrelevant.

 

The code don't lie. The design is what I feared it was: maintaining a synchronous connection to every single server....because they are trying to hide the price until the end.

 

If they stay with that design, programmers don't matter. No matter how much they love him, country and the Democratic party, they will still fail.

 

They have to cast off this silly "hide the price" requirement. As soon as they do, we can get back to proper methods for building e-commerce websites, and then, maybe, the website "works". I give that 2 chances in 10 however, due to the OTHER problems I've already stated.

 

But, the "834 issue" is the killer. You can't call this a "working website" with that issue still unresolved, and it's techincally impossible to get that to work using the current design. A re-design requires are a re-code and a re-test. You cannot do that, PROPERLY, in the time allowed, no matter how many people you add. The only other case: Lying about it. Saying "it works" when it doesn't.

 

So, again, I win.

[OCinBuffalo]

Ok, given the feedback....

 

Here is the low information voter version: even if they stop hiding how much you pay, it still won't be "working", because the chance that they can enroll/disenroll your personal signup by the Dec 1 deadline is ~5%. That's directly due to the FACT that the 834 transactions won't be working by then. That's not "working". That is "working ~5% of the time".

 

Unmitigated moron version: On Dec 1 go to the website, you sign up for what you want, you hit save, and nothing happens(because you can't be enrolled). Does that mean it's working? No. Have you purchased anything? NO! Can this website be powered by distilled birdog wishful thinking? NO!

 

Or, the conner version: nobody can do enroll in stuff, cause da website don't say nothing when you do. But I like Obama, cause he is cool. Repugs are dorks.

Edited November 15, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

No. You require me to be incompetent in my work, so that you can be "right". I refuse to be incompetent for you Chef. Remember who you are talking to: I could still be in the Valley, doing my job, right now. I refuse to associate myself with self-involved, pseudo-Buddhists, who self-congratulate as often and as regularly as Muslims pray. I chose to leave, and I can choose to go back: whatever suits me.

 

So these are the words of someone who has looked under the hood. Well I think someone forgot to tell you which end was the hood and you've been breathing in the exhaust fumes.

 

Thank God He will fix this site and have it operating smoothly by the deadline. I'm just hoping you've got enough of your presciptions left to hold you over because it sounds like you're running out. But not to worry as I've stated my position several times (while you've state.....well not quite sure actually) that the reason I KNOW this site will be fully functional is because as we all know if something is broken, and yes this broken right now, all you need to do is throw more money at it and Mr Obama has all the money one could ask for at his disposal. It will be fixed, I know it.

 

And I think the bottle on your prescription said not to mix with alcohol. I suggest your follow those directions a little closer from now on. Good luck.

[OCinBuffalo]

So these are the words of someone who has looked under the hood. Well I think someone forgot to tell you which end was the hood and you've been breathing in the exhaust fumes.

 

Thank God He will fix this site and have it operating smoothly by the deadline. I'm just hoping you've got enough of your presciptions left to hold you over because it sounds like you're running out. But not to worry as I've stated my position several times (while you've state.....well not quite sure actually) that the reason I KNOW this site will be fully functional is because as we all know if something is broken, and yes this broken right now, all you need to do is throw more money at it and Mr Obama has all the money one could ask for at his disposal. It will be fixed, I know it.

 

And I think the bottle on your prescription said not to mix with alcohol. I suggest your follow those directions a little closer from now on. Good luck.

So your entire argument(which as I said, is weak and hypothetical) is predicated upon the notion that throwing $ at it solves all?

 

Then you are done. Pack up your schit, Mr. "IT has nothing to do with this", and, "we have to look under the hood", at the same time.

 

We already have empirical evidence from this project that "throw money at it" has FAILed: the existing budget. (Yep, you're done) Now listen, you twit, a project like this doesn't cost $300 million to build. It doesn't. Not ever.

 

So, they've already "thrown money at it" haven't they, you unmitigated moron. And, did that work, nitwit? No. Now, you are proposing that they throw more? What a clown you are. Yeah, talking about me as if I'm the nut here?

 

Yeah, I'M the one that needs meds. I doubt they make medications strong enough to penetrate the amount of delusion/denial required to not see that they've already thrown FAR too much money at it and/or to not realize that you've just argued yourself into losing.

 

But enough of this hypothetical $ nonsense.

 

Throughout this thread I've made several empirical points that you've yet to address. Either you can't address them, because you're a moron, which means I win, or, you won't address them, because there's no refuting them. Which means I've won.

 

I'm rapidly growing tired of hearing the same hypothetical "it will work because of money/Valley people" argument, which is flimsy and lame.

 

Deal with the facts I've laid out, or concede defeat. Well, you can always talk about medication, or drinking, or whatever...

 

Fact #1: the insurance company IT people are flat out telling the guy in my link: there's no way this will be ready, due to the 834s.

 

That's the thing here Chef, one of many things I know, and you don't, every time you do an integration in a big organization, or among big organizations, there are ALWAYS 2 sides at least, and, these sides are like political parties. Each side has their own concerns, and project to support/defend.

 

These insurance company people quite literally live under the hood, every day. They are telling this "insider" guy it's not ready, because it isn't.

 

They have every reason to tell the truth, and absolutely MUST NOT LIE, in this situation. What purpose would be served by lying? As if every single thinking person in the USA doesn't have at least one eyeball on this story, looking for the next lie. As if the Democrats aren't desperately looking for another liar, so they can try to justify their liars.

 

No. Insurance company IT people have no reason to lie. They have EVERY reason to tell the truth and say it won't be ready, because it won't be, and they aren't going to allow yet another ObamaFAIL to blow up, and get some, or ALL of it on them. IF I was them, I'd be EXTREMELY wary of the Democrats(I had "the government" here, but, is this the really the government anymore?) trying to use me as a scapegoat.

 

So wary, that I'd make damn sure I went out to some insurance comany insider, set the record straight, and told him why it was going to not be ready be Dec 1, in detail, long before Obama and his Lie Machine get a chance to lie about me, and blame me for their incompetence.

Edited November 16, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

You know you are really making some good points.....I guess hard to tell when your opponent doesn't read your posts. The only people I know that talk as much as you are women. Jesus Christ dude at least they're good to look at. Can you keep to a reasonable number of words??

 

And yes money and power solve all the worlds problems and this administration has both in spades ya dumbass. Why do you think professional sports have installed salary caps.

[OCinBuffalo]

You know you are really making some good points.....I guess hard to tell when your opponent doesn't read your posts. The only people I know that talk as much as you are women. Jesus Christ dude at least they're good to look at. Can you keep to a reasonable number of words??

 

And yes money and power solve all the worlds problems and this administration has both in spades ya dumbass. Why do you think professional sports have installed salary caps.

You've addressed nothing I've said, and it is you, not I, that needs the explanations here.

 

I could have just said: "something technical" in a paragraph, (EDIT: I did, and took it out. I am saving it for you.) and leave it to you to figure it out, and then try and fail to argue against it.

 

Too easy.

 

Instead, I've explained it in detail, and in way that makes the techincal able to processed, even by a luddite such as yourself, so that you can't whine, and throw your hands up an say "technobabble" or "This has nothing to do with IT". (Yet, it is I, not you, that must "look under the hood"? Amazing contradiction) I even did it in verse to make it harder on me.

 

I could have just said the same thing every post, like you have, and not even tried to address what you've said, like you have.

 

I didn't.

 

In fact, I've won both your argument, and mine.

 

Your argument = throw money at it, and...some weird hypothetical about loyalty to Obama/Democratic party.

Throwing money at it solves nothing, because not only have they already thrown money at it, they've thrown 3 years at it. Are you telling me that the political appointee douches at CMS have an Obama loyalty problem, or a Democratic party loyalty problem? It's hard to find a Federal government agency in this administration hasn't gotten in trouble due to Obama loyalty problem!

 

So that's me: winning your argument.

 

My argument? You haven't even tried to win. I win that one by default.

 

What's left? More discussion of typos? Emoticons? Complaining because I have to explain the IT reasons it fails to you, when, if you had a clue, I wouldn't have to?

Edited November 18, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

You've addressed nothing I've said, and it is you, not I, that needs the explanations here.

 

 

I actually read only one or two sentences of each of your posst. So the reason I've not addressed anything you've said is because I've not really read anything you've said. Now let me explain why I have not read hardly anything you've written.

 

1. I don't have the time

2. I really am no into watching a guy suck his own dick. Well I assume yours is too small to do that so let me rephrase that. I'm not into watching a guy masturbate to pictures of himself.

 

So let me continue with my side of the argument. As you pointed out so well in a pervious post (I think that was your first post and that's all I read of that one) that I'm a financial planner. I manage an office not far from Silicon Valley and have several clients from Google, Apple, Oracle and Stanford. I have contacted each of them and have learned, just today, that Google has offered up 118 of their top programmers, Apple 72 of their best developers, Oracle 88 of their top engineers and Stanford their 14 best and brightest graduates of thier Technology Ventures Masters program. This is hush hush and you'll not find any information anywhere and I just happen to have the insiders info because of my connection to those places. I also learned that they have gotten together and have figured out a guaranteed fix to the Obamacare website problems. So masturbate all you want I've got the inside scoop and that is 292 people that I would imagine know at least 10 times more about these things than you do so I tend to agree with them way before I'd agree to read one of your posts.

 

And in the words of the great teenager gatorman...............BOOM!!!

[OCinBuffalo]

Well, now who's so full of himself?

 

 

I am tired of your nonsense Chef. Here:

 

http://www.wsbradio....k-not-finished/

 

"we still have to build the payment system to make payments to insurers in January."

 

"the website's development chief made news on Tuesday afternoon by adding that the work on the "back end"[my emphasis...um who said the back end wasn't finished, and wouldn't be?] of the computer system that supports healthcare.gov was only 60-70% finished."

 

Now STFU, you ignorant clown. I, yes I, TOLD YOU THIS EXACTLY, and in nursery ryhme format no less. I told you what was wrong with this thing. Now, the head of the entire project is telling you the same thing, nitwit.

 

I WIN. The rest of this is post is just me laughing at your inanity.

 

 

What are you gonna say now? How much more inside does it get, than the F'ing project manager telling you it won't be ready...until perhaps January at the earliest? Yeah, talk about me some more, do whatever douchy thing you have to do. But keep running from what that project manager, and this one, are telling you.

 

I figured this out by reviewing the code. I didn't get my answers, like you, by listening to the dopey plans of psyncophants talking about their leader.

 

That's the important thing here. All your little pissant California programmers can't do schit about a bad design. WTF did you think about bunch of pissant Californian pseudo-Buddhists would do, once they realized they were all in very real danger of being made into massive fools? After all, it's their money Obama spent to get elected.

 

Moreover, your statement them knowing 10x more? It's just lame. It shows how little you understand about IT. Are there guys in that group who are better, pound for pound Javascripit programmers tham me? Of course. There better be. If there wasn't all 3 companies are in serious trouble.

 

That's why you hire young programmers...to be better than you are, at programming in the "language of the day" what...you...tell them to. So, yeah, do I expect them to know more about some things, especially javascript. Of course. I knew more about PowerBuilder than most people at Sybase. That fact simply doesn't matter at all in the job I have now.

 

Whare you are saying: = "Look at those 292 pediatrists! They are better at foot medicine than you are, heart surgeon"!

 

What I am saying = "Yeah? I'm a heart surgeon. So whatever, clown. Btw, I'm a pretty good brain surgeon as well".

 

So la te da, Chef. Talk all you want, when you get done? I'll still be a "heart surgeon", and the people that matter know it.

 

That's the funny part. You are trying to provoke me...by using something I have contempt for. That's hilarious.

Edited November 19, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Chef Jim]

What??? I thought we were talking about a website? What the !@#$ does a foot doctor have to do with this argument? Now if you had said a proctologist that would make sense because you've got your head stuck way up your fat ass?

 

Aaaaaaanyway. I just heard from my Google client and he said from what he's heard they have the site almost ready for rollout and it looks pretty good. And here's the cool thing on how they did it. They've secretly rigged the google search engine to healthcare.gov so whenever someone does a search it routes them to the site to secretly test if the site can handle the traffic. And so far it's held up pretty good. I did a bing search to see how many people actually use google every day and it's over 5.1 million. So we've got more than two weeks to go and it looks like they're well on their way.

 

The only thing that concerns me is that another one of my clients who is a big wig at Oracle, he was actually responsible for the tweaking of the Team Oracle's boat in the America's Cup that allowed them to win 9 races in a row, is concerned that they've taken on too much too fast. But I don't know, I can't get that !@#$er to get his trust done so I really don't put a lot of faith in what he says but still.............

[OCinBuffalo]

The project manager came out and said it won't be ready until after January. I WIN.

 

 

They are building the rest of it "in January". That means it won't be ready until February, or, if they do the testing right, March. You need at least a month to perform the proper tests. It should take 3 months, but, I am giving you the "bute force resources" thing, because why not? It doesn't make you any less wrong.

 

But, really, are you F'ing dense? You think some QA clown knows more than the project manager, talking about the project he runs, on the public record?

 

You and Google boy are in serious need of a grip. Performance testing a web server(which is all your dopey kid is doing) to see if the url responds, is a far cry from making remote procedure calls in a 50+ server integration come back with the correct responses(with 99.999% guarnateed uptime), and holding them in memory both on client and server, so they can "hide the price until the end" as per the dopey design of this thing, as per the dopey requirements of this thing.

 

This aggregates to: "I can get to the home page, but, I still can't do anything once there, because the backend still doesn't work". Great plan. "The Google search engine comes to the rescue"...of nobody and nothing.

 

EDIT: I dare you to send what is bolded above, or any part of this, to Google boy. That's because I have no fear whatsoever of his response. He may, or may not, understand what I'm saying, but that's unimportant: because I do.

 

Clarification:

Deleted, because neither you or Google boy is paying my hourly rate, and I'm not going to listen to you whine about length of post.

END Clarification

 

I love how this "isn't about IT" but now, you're talking about how Google boy is running performance tests on a webserver.

 

Hilarious. What does Google boy have to say about the confirmed fact that the 834 transactions are in the weeds, and, does he know anything at all, about database design? How many large databases has he designed? How many OLTP/OLAP DB achitectures? How many muliti-platform, multi-division, multi-national enterprise integrations has he built on those architectures? If he works at Google, his best answer is? 1(one): Google's.

 

I've done 15, for some of the biggest companies there are, in addition to some of the biggest startups(then). St. Gobain had 50 American divisions, never mind the rest of the world. That's 50 CIOs and Division Presidents, all with their own agenda, and every reason to screw each other over. I still made it work.

 

But yeah, you go ahead and listen to dopey Google boy, who clearly doesn't even understand the problem, yet has his solution all lined up. How progressive of him.

 

"The google search engine" = the solution to everything. And what a surpirse that a clown from Google would think that it is. Just like: Obamacare is the solution to everything, huh?

 

So ridiculous I literally spit out my Dr. Pepper when I read it.

Edited November 20, 2013 by OCinBuffalo