|
I have a Waitrose and feel smug and patrician whenever I shop there
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 12:06 |
|
|
baka kaba posted:No they're saying your "it's simple guys, like technology #whoa" thing you've been on this whole time is dumb It's a big job, yeah, but the rest don't apply with a sufficient budget, because as it turns out, we both have the technology and the people who can do this poo poo already ready to go, all you have to do is to ~pay them~. Also pay nurses. Paying and having more nurses is good, and they'll pick up new systems fast since the system they use now is a half-birthed abomination of rot that they weren't properly trained with in the first place, because budget cuts.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:It's a big job, yeah, but the rest don't apply with a sufficient budget, because as it turns out, we both have the technology and the people who can do this poo poo already ready to go, all you have to do is to ~pay them~.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:It's a big job, yeah, but the rest don't apply with a sufficient budget, because as it turns out, we both have the technology and the people who can do this poo poo already ready to go, all you have to do is to ~pay them~. Oh and another thing about money: the NHS aint got none lol
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
As a systems analyst and software developer with 25 years experience (with 1 year working in the NHS last year) I assure you it would a loving nightmare disaster from hell and take even longer than the still not working universal credit system (which is much less complex), and probably still not work by the time it was done. The integrations alone would be astonishingly painful. I suppose I take your point that if you threw enough money at it it would be possible but even then I have my doubts and im not sure the public would be happy about 100 billion spent on some 'computer programs'.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
If you gave the NHS 200 billion quid to spend on computer bollocks I'm pretty sure that a lot of people would bid for the work and none of them would be able to do it.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:If you gave the NHS 200 billion quid to spend on computer bollocks I'm pretty sure that a lot of people would bid for the work and none of them would be able to do it. Given that sort of budget id want to see the NHS move to Apple computers to ensure attacks like this can't happen again.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Given the potential rewards from being the first guys to hold a system that expensive to ransom I doubt it.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Cannon & Ball: back in action!
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:As a systems analyst and software developer with 25 years experience (with 1 year working in the NHS last year) I assure you it would a loving nightmare disaster from hell and take even longer than the still not working universal credit system (which is much less complex), and probably still not work by the time it was done. The integrations alone would be astonishingly painful. I suppose I take your point that if you threw enough money at it it would be possible but even then I have my doubts and im not sure the public would be happy about 100 billion spent on some 'computer programs'. ... the ballpark number for the migration staff alone to do it in two waves is £10bil. The big datacenters aren't free, the necessary expert staff to design it from mainland Europe are expensive, a bunch of decaying hardware would need to be replaced... £100bil sounds about right.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
loving hell Yeah the technology exists to replace the current NHS... situation... with a stable, secure and maintainable IT infrastructure. Yes there are people who can make this happen. The hard problem involves the actual analysis of the existing mess of systems, the design of a universal infrastructure that covers all the current use-cases (and is fully audited to make sure this is definitely the result), the provision for all the situations where it needs to integrate with another system that can't be replaced (like medical hardware). This whole mess needs to be condensed down into a well-designed, consistent set of systems. For something the size of the NHS this ain't trivial And that's only the design stage. To get it into production you have to run it alongside the current system, pulling in the current data from the patchwork of current systems that are still running live, you have to make sure that conversion and storage is happening perfectly (missing some part of a patient's medical history could be 'real bad') so you end up with a perfect and seamless transition from all these other systems to this new one. Again, with what seems like multiple trusts basically running stuff as a bespoke local network, that's a whole load of cats to herd And then you have to train people to use this new system - while they continue to use whatever old one they're on, because the NHS has to keep working. "They'll pick up new systems fast" - a thing nobody ever says about end users, unless accompanied by a hollow laugh and downing a shot. Lots of people struggle with technology in general, never mind doing stuff in a new and different way, and there's not a lot of leeway for problems in something as critical the NHS I dunno man, your whole point seems to be 'this is totally possible, therefore it's easy and just needs money thrown at it' which sounds incredibly naive, am I missing something here?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Sounds to me a lot like the public sector has bungled it yet again 
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:loving hell It needs money thrown at it and competent, focused government to manage it. I mean, the point is that it's not only possible, it could already have been done and given the maintenance costs of the existing system, it'd arguably not even cost all that much more had it been done so in the first place. The individual pieces aren't unsolvable or even unsolved, there's little to no unknowns left. You'd need tens of thousands of IT guys to actually pull it off before decay sets in, which, uh, are still available but not as cheap as five years ago. As far as I'm concerned, if a government just needs to hire staff to accomplish something, it's easy for a government problem. It doesn't require out-of-the-box thinking or figuring out new problems. Of course, the EU has research on the problem - which Britain helped to fund and thus is entitled to use - which solved most of the actual hard problems, so it's easy because someone else already did all the heavy lifting.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/s67JD3bKW0U
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Given that sort of budget id want to see the NHS move to Apple computers to ensure attacks like this can't happen again. Not sure 200 billion would be enough for that
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:I dunno man, your whole point seems to be 'this is totally possible, therefore it's easy and just needs money thrown at it' which sounds incredibly naive, am I missing something here? And just to drive that point home - the EU has a lot of research on how to convert data from multiple healthcare systems into one big one, because it turns out that's a recurring problem. There's no need to start from scratch when there's a template for doing it already there, one that's better researched than the UK ever could.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
New Comres poll https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/863439018071126016 Some stuff from the tabs: - Tories lead across all social groups. - Labour is significantly ahead among both 18-24 year olds (51% v 26%) and 25-34 year olds (51% v 28%). However 66% of over 65s intend to vote Tory. - Corbyn remains significantly behind on most 'good PM' measures, but he leads on the NHS and looking out for hard working families. - Only 13% say they would vote tactically to prevent one party getting too large a majority. - In a nice reversal, more people believe they would pay less tax under Labour than the Tories (53% v 47%). - A third of people are still to make their mind up, but unfortunately older voters are also the most certain of their vote. But remember, the real opposition party is either the Lib Dems or UKIP, because they both replaced Labour after Corbyn ruined it. jabby fucked around with this message at 21:10 on May 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:There's no need to start from scratch I have worked in software development for a long long time and you are correct, and I have uttered that same phrase too many times to count. Guess what, they'll start from scratch anyway. They always do.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Pochoclo posted:I have worked in software development for a long long time and you are correct, and I have uttered that same phrase too many times to count. I mean my point all along has been that this isn't a technology problem, the technology is there and is cheaper than maintaining a patchwork of nightmares in the long run... it's a "people are idiots and implement their bespoke artisanal powershell scripts and will cut corners and leave parts of the system to rot and then blame that on cyberwizards" problem. Those who know technology are doomed to stand by and watch as people who don't blame it for all their problems.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
jabby posted:New Comres poll It's almost like all the olds that voted for the UK to leave are committed to voting Tories to make sure the job is done while the the remainers are suppressed and their vote is spread across multiple parties. While that does excuse the lead, it doesn't excuse Labour's failed attempt to court these lost causes. Regarde Aduck fucked around with this message at 21:18 on May 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:It's almost like all the olds that voted for the UK to leave are committed to voting Tories to make sure the job is done. While that does excuse the lead, it doesn't excuse Labour's failed attempt to court these lost causes. Trouble is, a strategy of "don't try and attract the votes from anyone over 35" (or even just over 65) just wouldn't be credible for a party that wishes to form a government.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Trouble is, a strategy of "don't try and attract the votes from anyone over 35" (or even just over 65) just wouldn't be credible for a party that wishes to form a government. Normally I'd agree but in this particular case nothing is going to stop all the leave voters voting for strong and stable May.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:Normally I'd agree but in this particular case nothing is going to stop all the leave voters voting for strong and stable May. You kind of have to try though, which is why Labour is going relatively hard on keeping the triple lock. 40% of over 65's did vote remain after all, and should be somewhat possible to pick off. The best hope for Labour currently is probably Corbyn doing well on his TV appearances and managing to narrow the gap a bit over the next four weeks, and then the youth vote turning out significantly more than the pollsters have been expecting.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
There was an interesting piece in the Guardian about when Australian Labour faced a similar problem to the one British Labour is facing now. They dumped their unpopular party leader in the lead up to the election and reversed it into a landslide win. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/12/jeremy-corbyn-bob-hawke-general-election-landslide It may not be too late!
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:It may not be too late! This article is moronic and so are you
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:There was an interesting piece in the Guardian about when Australian Labour faced a similar problem to the one British Labour is facing now. That might be the dumbest poo poo I've read all year. The article is real bad too.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:There was an interesting piece in the Guardian about when Australian Labour faced a similar problem to the one British Labour is facing now. Alright Name our Bob Hawke and I'll think about it
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Alright David Miliband.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
He's not even in parliament. Does he even want to get back into politics?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:He's not even in parliament. Does he even want to get back into politics? He works for the Thunderbirds now
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Alright 
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:He's not even in parliament. Does he even want to get back into politics? Even if he did he'd be too late to register to stand, so you'd have a leader who wasn't in the House of Commons. It's moronic. https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/863492244300550145 UKIP on 3% 
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
jabby posted:Even if he did he'd be too late to register to stand, so you'd have a leader who wasn't in the House of Commons. It's moronic. Labour fightback is on! Just 20 points to go It would really be nice if they could get there. Alas, I don't think they will.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:David Miliband. He's got my vote
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
Who's the rock biter in this analogy
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
The Mirror have done a diabolical write-up of the Comres poll from today. Two of their key points: - The manifesto clearly hasn't made a difference (fieldwork was done on the day of the leak and day after, before anyone knew the manifesto promises) - Labour would need to gain 5% a week to equal the Tories by the election (a fundamental misunderstanding of how percentages work) How are people so dumb actually in charge of the political commentary in this country?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:I mean my point all along has been that this isn't a technology problem, the technology is there and is cheaper than maintaining a patchwork of nightmares in the long run... it's a "people are idiots and implement their bespoke artisanal powershell scripts and will cut corners and leave parts of the system to rot and then blame that on cyberwizards" problem. You have multiple people with years or decade of tech experience telling you you are being hopelessly naive here. I'd like to add my voice to them. You have no idea how this works out in the real world.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
if you just hold out for another 200 years, all the bugs with XP will have been found and patched surely
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 12:06 |
|
|
feedmegin posted:You have multiple people with years or decade of tech experience telling you you are being hopelessly naive here. I'd like to add my voice to them. You have no idea how this works out in the real world. To be fair isn't this thread sort of a celebration of not having any idea how various things work out in the real world? Like look two posts above yours at the guy who thinks the Mirror is wrong and omg the mirror is so dumb.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 22:25
|
|