FEMA Demands Use of IE To File Online Katrina Claims 1165
WebHostingGuy writes "As reported by MSNBC, if you survived the hurricane and are a Mac, Linux or Firefox user you cannot file a claim online. Further, you must have javascript enabled or face rejection. From the site: 'We are sorry for not being able to proceed your requests because you have failed our tests.' Opera and Netscape don't work either." Also reported at InformationWeek. From that story: "To file a claim online at FEMA's Individual Assistance Center, where citizens can apply for government help, the browser must be IE 6.0 or later with JavaScript enabled. That cuts out everyone running Linux or the Mac operating systems, as well as Windows users running alternate browsers such as Firefox or Opera. When TechWeb tested the site using Windows XP and Firefox 1.0.6, the message 'In order to use this site, you must have JavaScript Enabled and Internet Explorer version 6. Download it from Microsoft or call 1-800-621-FEMA (3362) to register' popped up on the screen." Update: 09/08 13:48 GMT by Z : Added word 'Online' to title to clarify story.
Conspiracy Theory (Score:1, Insightful)
FEMA's web portal design is the least of our probs (Score:3, Insightful)
So? (Score:4, Insightful)
Its a non-issue. A tiny percentage of real users have heard of anything other than IE, and an even tinier percentage of people who need FEMA support have electricity, internet access or a computer anymore.
If you all are going to get bent about something FEMA is doing, get bent about the fact that phone and internet is the only way to register and most refugees have neither. Or get bent about the fact that 90% of calls don't go through to the FEMA number.
This is just rediculous to get worked up about. Who cares? If 1% of thet people affected have internet access, and 1% of those use Firefox (and happen to be using someones computer that has Firefox and not IE), then out of the million people affected, what? 100 might have a problem? 100 people tech aware enough to use firefox? They probably can find a damn cell phone.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Should wait until the site is cross compatible (Score:2, Insightful)
Obviously.
I'm surprised this is even an issue for anyone. There is a huge disaster recovery effort going on and they need to have things working as soon as possible. If it requires IE, then that's just how it's going to be for the time being. There are other methods to file your claim (and let's face it, if you're online, you've got it better than 99% of the refugees who are stuck in a shelter).
Re:Sorry but the subject of this article is mislea (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:IE on Mac (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:One line of code. (Score:1, Insightful)
typical for government jobs. given to the lowest bidder which means some moron in his basement with a copy of frontpage. and these people dare to call themselves "developers"
they are not. and never will be.
Re:Sorry but the subject of this article is mislea (Score:4, Insightful)
You shouldn't use clientsided checking, as the golden rule in web developing is that you can't trust the client, EVER. Clientsided checking should only be used as a convenience for the user (save the user a trip to the server and back because he forgot to fill in something), not for anything serious. You have to check input at the server script anyway, so why not allow non-javascript browsers?
Annoying thing is (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Sorry but the subject of this article is mislea (Score:5, Insightful)
You should also never be mandating error checking of complex forms on the client side because you can't control the client-side. If it's complex enough that you can't reliably deploy it in JS, you should be writing that logic into the server side code.
In other news FEMA missed the cluetrain (Score:4, Insightful)
Back in the day, FEMA was drilled and had a civilian function though the Civil Defense program. FEMA was well drilled and practiced at large scale disasters because it was busy preparing to deal with what happens after a massive nuclear strike. In the 80s much of FEMAs prepositioned assets were sold off (as opposed to updated) - handy stuff like surgical kits, sealed ready for action truck-in hospitals, pre-built emergency clinics, ready to go tent towns and prepositioned ration reserves. I bought some stuff at a local government auction when it happened, too (nice tents, cots, surgical kits make nice fly tying tools).
The cold war era FEMA would have easily handled this disaster. The military commad structure would not have been nearly so worried about waiting for approval from a clueless governor or a mayor who was stuck in a location with limited communication capacity. Sometimes it is better to ask forgiveness from the politicians than the public.
FEMA demands? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this FEMA demanding? Or an ignorant IT services supplier supplying a solution which only works on the IE6 platform? Or (horror of horrors) is this system an in-house job?
Maybe FEMA need to revist their IT procurement strategy - if they have one.
In a situation like this, I would have thought that every effort would be made to make the application process accessible to everybody.
First hand experience. (Score:3, Insightful)
I can also tell you that the people waist deep in this disaster really appreciate the media and Slashdot slashdotting the FEMA site right when they need it the most. But, at least you worthless bastards are doing your part by whining about their choice of browser, stuff that really matters! The browser debate was really important to me when I had no water or electricity for a month!
Re:FEMA's web portal design is the least of our pr (Score:5, Insightful)
When a public institution sets up a service with the tax payer's money for the tax payers to use and in the end there are clients which *UNNECESSARILY* can't access the service, that is just plain incompetence.
Re:One line of code. (Score:2, Insightful)
They are building services for american Citizens, not Windows or Mac or *nix users. There are industy standards out there so that websites can be created that all browsers that any citizen uses should be able to access.
Hey your house was just destroyed and you lost everything, and they let you stay in this nice school gymnasium. Sorry, but you can't file with FEMA using the computers in the library because they decided to use Linux with Opera as the default install. Maybe you can use on of the systems in the administrative offices? They have Windows 98. Oh, sorry. You'll have to download IE6 since they were still using IE 5.x. Maybe you can go use the computers at the big company down the road you lazy git, or just mail in the paper forms. It's not my fault you don't use windows.
STOP WHINING! (Score:1, Insightful)
Non-MS users quite probably have access to printers, faxes, postboxes and probably telephones as well.... maybe they even have pens too (shock, horror).
The way things are going Americans are soon gonna be complaining because their government didn't wipe their asses properly (or in time). What happened to individual responsibilty? Get a grip!
In Sudan women have been gang-raped and seen thier entire families cut to death. Do you think they would give a flying F$#% if they couldn't fill in their "Compensation for having my entire life fucked up" form in Opera, Firefox, Netscape, Lynx or any other dumb-ass browser???
Get some perspective people.
Re:And this a problem How? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sorry but the subject of this article is mislea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:One line of code. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the problem and solution may not be related. Hang with me on this one. We are asking the browser to the website what brand of browser it is and then the website determines what you can and cannot see simply based on that one piece of information. It should be a little different, the web site asks, can you handle JavaScript and a reply of yes from the browser. The website will now send you JavaScript info. Can you handle frames, DHTML, CSS and the list goes on as new technologies are added. So your browser would have an XML sheet of the response it should give to questions. Don't like JavaScript edit it to NO and the website should handle the request properly anyway.
I really think that the User Agent string should be abandoned to prevent poor coupling and cohesion of website and browsers. This User Agent string should be replaced with a list of browser capabilities.
Crap. (Score:5, Insightful)
If this was a business, fine, who cares. But this is a disaster relief agency funded by taxpayer dollars, and they goddamn well better have a site that can be viewed by all citizens who need to view it.
Just part and parcel with the rest of their collossal incompetence during the current distaster.
And don't tell me they have better things to do; I haven't seen 'em do hardly anything yet. They could have used the week after the hurricane, when they were sitting around with their thumbs up their asses while everyone else was doing their job for them to at least make a webpage that could at least be viewed by the people who're still using older versions of IE!
A new low for Slashdot. (Score:1, Insightful)
Really, there is more to life than your choice in an operating system, and events such as this one should be more than a sufficient reminder.
Assuming those people have their computers still (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Virtual PC (Score:3, Insightful)
That whooshing sound was you missing the point entirely.
Re:American citizens must use windows... (Score:2, Insightful)
Like if you want to go to McDonalds drive-thru you need to have a car. That's not discriminating against non-drivers, it's just saying that if you want to get food you have to wait in line inside.
having said that, I agree, all webpages should work in mozilla, too. But they chose to develop for the most popular browser.
Re:A new low for Slashdot. (Score:5, Insightful)
Having said that, the whole situation is bringing other issues to light as well. Requiring IE (6 or later) is just stupid and puts up another hurdle for some of the people seeking assistance.
This is the type of system that should be designed to conform to industry standards and the lowest common denominator. After a disaster we shouldn't be picky. Maybe all the "good" PCs got destroyed.
Re:FEMA's web portal design is the least of our pr (Score:1, Insightful)
If not, why are they wasting resources doing it at all?
If so, why are they reducing the number of people they help by doing a half baked job of it?
They've put resources into the web portal, so it must be important and important to do it properly.
Re:ADA? (Score:5, Insightful)
In a company, somone can find it most beneficial and cost effective (sometimes, wrongly so) to support the browser that has 80-90% market share (I'm probably off on that stat, but that's not the point). However, when it comes to providing aid to hurricane victims, the government is simply not allowed to only provide to 80-90% of the people.
There should not be any development costs even considered. Make the website work for everyone because EVERYONE needs the help. This is aid, not sales.
Re:One line of code. (Score:3, Insightful)
If it doesn't work by default then it is broken by most clueless user's standards.
Re:FEMA's web portal design is the least of our pr (Score:3, Insightful)
A multi-browser interface requires a different design, not necessarily a more expensive one.
It was likely more a case of FEMA doing a poor job of anticipating the needs of their customers.
If it was important enough for FEMA to spend resources to create an online form, it should have been important enough to take into account how people would likely access the form.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Aid workers are busy setting up computers for these people to use to contact relatives and fill out aid forms. They are not getting free Dell computers or free Windows licenses. They are setting up older computers that have been donated and may not run IE 6.
3. FEMA's listed phone number will trigger an automated form delivery to your home address. In New Orleans. Not very helpful.
The target audience doesn't care (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You knew it was coming... (Score:2, Insightful)
Also buried in there is the fact that Bush never even gave the order to *use* the military. He ordered them to be ready to go, but never bothered to send them in until days later.
Is Bush responsible for the 'unacceptable' response to this disaster? No, he's not. But is he ultimately 'accountable'? You damn well bet he is. These are his federal appointees that are macking a mockery of relief, and so he's accountable for putting unqualified people in place.
And since he's obviously put unqualified people in before...you can bet any new Bush appointees will be seriously questioned in the future.
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. (Score:4, Insightful)
there ought to be a law... (Score:3, Insightful)
Why people like the FSF aren't out there pursuing this instead of trying to ram political stuff into GPLV3, is what I want to know.
Great work, Slashdot (Score:2, Insightful)
Good work and foresight, there, editors.
And, you don't HAVE to Have IE 6 with JS enabled to file a claim. You could just use a TELEPHONE.
Re:you know... (Score:2, Insightful)
The FEMA website specifically checks only for the user agent string - and repels non-IE browsers. Proving they've taken EXTRA efforts to repel the rest.
Highly mischevous.
Turing-completeness (Score:2, Insightful)
They've got finite memory, don't they?
Re:FEMA's web portal design is the least of our pr (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:there ought to be a law... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Sorry but the subject of this article is mislea (Score:3, Insightful)
In particular, a lot of people use client-side error checking instead of server side, for which they should be taken outside and shot. Client side error checking is a nice thing so the user doesn't waste a form submission, but is not a replacement for properly validating user input.
Sorry, just fed up with everyone who knows Visual Basic and/or what the <script> tag does calling themselves a web application developer.
Re:Should wait until the site is cross compatible (Score:5, Insightful)
AFAICT, many of those filing claims have to do it on line. The are running into problems with this setting up computer kiosks at all the shelters, since even if they are setting up a PC with Windows, it has to have the right version of IE, and many of the PCs are donated.
They can't do it via mail - a ton of people lost their homes, and have no address. Even those who have an address in LA, AL, or MI are still in trouble if they were near the disaster area since the postal service has halted mail delivery.
They can't do it via phone - those that have called have reported that FEMA will only mail them a claim form via the phone.
Is there some other method I am overlooking? AFAICT if you lost your house, and you don't have access to the right version of a web browser this is a pretty major issue.
Re:You knew it was coming... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
While I'm not fully angry, I think this example situation speaks very loudly of how important adherance to standards really is. Microsoft has used its edge on the operating systems market to encourage and create a state where people do not have choice and must surrender their security, their individuality and personal sense of style if they want to accomplish day-to-day business. And worse to be completely denied convenient access in cases of extreme emergency.
Of course the web site planners need to be severely criticised for their decision to select a technology that disallows access to people who need it.
Consider that many people are still using Windows98. Consider that there are a lot of people who bought those Lindows machines from Fry's and Walmart and that's pretty much all they could afford. What we have now is a situation where those that "have not" or "choose not" are excluded from services that are critical to survival. Is this an exaggeration? It's a knee-jerk reaction to be sure, but just because 99% of the users can gain access is no reason to consider the other users to be "an acceptable casualty."
Your own damn fault... (Score:2, Insightful)
It is your own damn fault that things like this happen. It is you who need to stand up, write to your congressmen, and demand that laws would be passed where public information as well as public government websites be made available indiscriminant of the tools the citizens have to access them. And if the citizens do not have the tools to access them, the government should provide those for free (how expensive is it to provide an iso image of a bootable CD that has a browser - pick a choise of quite a number these days).
All of the government websites should be required by law to be written for the lowest common denominator between all the browsers adhering to the most widely supported HTML standard among them all.
I think this kind of follows in the same tracks as serving the blind and the deaf, they are a minority, yet they are just as important members of this society. Perhaps lynx users are also a minority, yet I do not find any reason to think why they would be any less valuable members of it.
Yes, most of the blind and the deaf became not of their own choosing, and yes, not all of the lynx users are using it because they just love it. There are times when circumstances limit you to using a particular browser, say IE no matter how much you hate it, however I would expect to be able to access my government's site no matter what browser I have at hand at the moment.
So get off your behinds, and do something about it, because I cannot do that for you, your government does not allow me to.
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
blocking claims is blocking claims (Score:2, Insightful)
I work in this industry and can assure readers with no uncertainty that such users comprise well more than 1% of the computing population. Recent numbers put non-IE6 use for a number of popular sites anywhere between 12-26%. My read is that US government sites will currently attract a number at the low end of that range.
Whether or not site compatibility is a priority right now IS debatable so long as people have other means of contact but this should NEVER have happened in the first place.
Re:you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, when the incompetence is deliberate (as in the loading of all of the top jobs with starkly unqualified political cronies) it is malice.
Re:ADA? (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure it is.
Do you see anyone brave enough to stand up to the Bush family, or congress, or the state and local governments, for having provided aid to only 80-90% of the people during and after the mandatory evacation, much less during and after the storm itself?
Bush sat on his ass, on vacation, while people died and his incompetent, nepotistic administration did nothing, then too little too late, and turned around and blamed state and local officials who were reduced to using the media to get their pleas for help to the president because, as democrats, they weren't allowed by the president's handlers to talk to the man personally (for a number of days).
The fact is, they probably will get away with this, just as they have gotten away with a growing list of appallingly atrocious behavior that would have resulted in the impeachment of any other president, Democrat or Republican.
Re:you know... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:you know... (Score:2, Insightful)
None of you are posting this from the Astrodome. And I dont think many people who have access to PCs at this point are getting to the FEMA website from anything other than a public terminal (library, internet cafe, etc).
Like it or not IE is the majority market browser. That means that FEMA (which, dont get me wrong, has mishandled everything) doesnt CARE about CBC.
Perhaps its because they want to get claims handled quickly (although I'm probably giving them too much credit).
How many people in the Astrodome are testing this in Firefox? No one here's filing a FEMA claim, I'd be willing to bet my house on that.
This became news because it has IE all over it. No other reason than to throw another piece of meat to the /. first post campers.
Who cares what browser theyre using? Isnt there anything else more important to report on? Something that needs duping?
Re:accessibility is the way to do this (Score:5, Insightful)
No whining, ...do (Score:4, Insightful)
I have found that writing emails about the situation, the existence of the World Wide Web Consortium standards body, and the existence as well as compliance of "other browsers" with the w3.org standards.... politely, usually results in the site getting updated when the organization gets a chance.
Nobody wants to have their organization as being seen as backwards technically or with regards to standards.
Please do no just complain about this issue on slashdot. Send a polite not to FEMA.
Spoken Language in the Government sphere (Score:1, Insightful)
The USA has no National Language, which then dictates that (IIRC, IANAL) the government must provide/accept documents in any language requested. This is in part due to our ideals of democracy, equality and so on, which makes sense: any citizen (we are assuming an ability to read some language) should be able to read (or respond to) documents generated by the government.
That said, it seems to me that the government is doing precisely the opposite in this case. They have chose (whether actively or passively) a specific 'language' and then stated directly that if you don't speak that 'language' you are simply not allowed to file this request.
Now, there is the obvious argument that requests can be filed offline, so they are not absolutely excluding people, yet I fail to see why the government could restrict online when it is not legally allowed to offline.
In all honesty, this probably does go back to incompetence. Unfortunately for them, incompetence may be a reason, but it is not an excuse. Especially when there are so many techies out there who could easily fix such a thing (and also need jobs, but that is another issue for another time).
C'mon US of A, hold yourself at least to your own standards.
nobody can file a claim online in fact (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not that being this stupid in any way is any more tolerable than if they had done it deliberately, but still...
Re:FEMA's web portal design is the least of our pr (Score:2, Insightful)
I might agree that this is not the biggest fuckup of FEMA but it's just one more proof that lots of people there are not doing their job.
BTW, many people were writing that refugees don't have computers and Internet access to use this portal anyhow. Most of the refugees by now are located outside of the disater area and any (or most) town libraries have Internet access. So Internet may be the best way for them to file claims and look for relatives.
Re:You knew it was coming... (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the leader of the free world we're talking about. He leads the world's remaining superpower. He is the commander and chief.
He could have gotten things done quicker if he had the interest or will. He could have slapped around some beaurocrats. He could have used military resouces or personnel.
He simply neglected the situation.
At the very least, the shelters of last resort and the hospitals should have been immediately secured and supplied with MREs. Some part of the federal disaster apparatus should have been sticking it out with the civilians on the ground.
This could have been Rangers, Seals, boots from the Marine Corps school of Infantry at Camp Gieger or just a bunch of Amry/Marine cooks. The situation demanded inspired leadership and just plain leadership rather than disinterest and mediocrity.
Once it was clear that we had an event capable of creating 1 million US refugees, Bush should have put himself at the disposal of the Mayor, the Governor and the commander of the LA Engineers garrison.
If someone in FEMA needed a kick in the ass, they should have gotten it. If private sector resources would have been useful, Bush should have leaned on the relevant CEOs.
The federal response is a manifestation of the CYA mentality. That just doesn't cut it when shit is hitting the fan.
Re:You knew it was coming... (Score:5, Insightful)
Give me a break. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:you know... (Score:2, Insightful)
However, appointing incompetants is a sign of incompetence.
In consideration (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
I seem to recall a phrase from a President...
Something about a buck stopping somewhere...
Especially since the bucks responsible for upgrading the levee system were PERSONALLY slashed from the budget and diverted to Iraq - which in itself was a fucking moronic operation.
Not to mention the moronic folding of FEMA into DHS,as has been pointed out by every commentator in the last week. Which was no surprise to me, since FEMA's primary mandate is to secure the state, not the citizenry, in an emergency. In fact, the only "emergency" FEMA is mandated to "manage" is a threat against the state. It's no accident they're the ones with the authority to do all the things the conspiracy buffs like to cite.
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
What a lame ass excuse.
So what the hell are they waiting for now? Simply cut out the offending line of code that checks the user-agent string, and oh yeah, try testing the damn thing. No need to create a new application.
Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
Re:you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Wrong.
When your concept of "statesmanship" is paying off your political cronies regardless of competence, that IS malice.
The hallmark of the state is ALWAYS malice AND incompetence. Heinlein was wrong as it applies to the state.
Re:I'm going to quote someone I despise (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think anyone is really disagreeing with you (and I don't really see that you're disagreeing with others, either). Certainly if this is the site, then this is the site. Nobody wants them to take it down if they don't have an alternative in place (although, really, how long would it take to build an alternative that is compatible? a week? This is an online form that interfaces with an existing database, most web devs could build a low-tech HTML 3.0 version on a gray page background in 4 hours and leave the rest of the week for making sure the database spits out usable error messages when field validation fails)
The main point is we SHOULD complain and say that it isn't good enough, it isn't satisfactory, and it needs to be improved ASAP. It is unacceptable for an organization that specifically targets those with the least amount of choice in resources. Truthfully, I think it's unacceptable for ANY government organization, but this one in particular -- the evacuees don't get to pick and choose whether they have access to a phone, a Windows PC, a Mac, or a Linspire from Wal*Mart.
But we have to make noise about the issue so that it is fixed and people in power pay attention to it for the few moments they are forced to look at these normally invisible technical matters.
Re:you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
But what I fear is malice sufficiently advanced enough to disguise itself as incompetence.
Re:While I Agree that this is Egregious... (Score:5, Insightful)
So, you're in a strange city, and your Dell Celeron box is sitting under a foot of mud. Doesn't really matter, as it's two hundred miles away, behind police roadblocks and without power, phone or broadband.
You can't reach FEMA on the phone - they keep hanging up on you because they're swamped.
You're looking for a computer with an internet connection. Not just any computer. No macs, no 'NIX, no webtv, no cellphone browsers, no older PCs. Windows XP doesn't even assure you success. It has to have IE 6, which was a large download and was unavailable at the launch time of any Windows desktop operating system.
You're looking for a computer that has either been updated, or is fairly new and runs windows. Heck, I've never seen IE 6 in a library! Around here, they run IE 5 or Navigator!
Re:You knew it was coming... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Should wait until the site is cross compatible (Score:3, Insightful)
I call bullstuff.
It's obvious from the short period of time FEMA has had to set up this registration site that the code behind it has been in development for some time. It's likely a standard set of pages and code that come from a template they developed, so they copy it over and change the names and database connection and they're site's up and running. The problem isn't that FEMA was caught having to react to a disaster - that's their job. The problem is that their solution and design were chosen without concern for the actual needs and capabilities of the people they are chartered to assist.
Access isn't about Minority or not, the ADA still requires wheelchair accessible bathroom stalls and entryways regardless the microscopic percentage of your employees that actually need them.
The bottom line is that there are probably a couple of guys who make decisions high up in the FEMA IT department who - for whatever reason - just don't understand the fact that not everyone "lives in a Microsoft world" with them.
For the sake of the people who NEED to register (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:you know... (Score:4, Insightful)
And (unless you're some kind of super-genius at every task they do) will be utterly despised by the poor fuckers who work under you.
Say it with me:
Unecessarily restricting your options is a Bad Thing.
Vendor lock-in is a Bad Thing.
Proprietary/nonstandard/deliberately-non-interope
Assuming you'll know the every single requirement placed on your system for the entire future of its lifetime is impossible, hubristic and stupid. This is a Bad Thing.
Designing to open standards, avoiding unnecessary vendor lock-in and maximising interoperability are Good Things.
Any questions?
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, no (Score:1, Insightful)
No, disobey.
1) How will he tell?
2) If it works, why will he bother?
3) You'll give yourself an ulcer if you keep bending over like that
4) If you let the insane define reality, then your reality will be insane
5) NEVER get into a position where you *need* the job. Build up, save a little, keep within your means and you can kiss a stupid job goodbye (note: if you get sacked because you didn't apply the required solution, but still got the result, you will get severance and dole).
Life is too short to fight ALL the time, but it is too long to give in to any pissant napoleon. You have a backbone. Use it.
Re:you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:First hand experience. (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference being, you were in the area where the disaster occurred and dealing with the damaged infrastructure. The people from Katrina are not sitting around New Orleans trying to fill out FEMA forms online, they are 600 miles away in Texas, Alabama, etc, where electricity, phones and computers are available to them.
Those computers are all old, donated systems from corporations looking for a tax break. Those computers do NOT have dual Xeon processors and Windows XP with IE 6 on them, they're old Pentiums and PIIs running windows 98/IE5 and that sort of thing. God forbid Wal*Mart should donate a bunch of new $400 Linspire computers to the Red Cross thinking they can actually be any help.
You wait in line for the computers, you wait in line for the phones, but hopefully everyone can get their stuff done. If you say "oh, none of the computers work with any of the forms you need to resume your life as a human being", then blammo, you just made everybody wait twice as long for the phone.
Re:you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
The head of FEMA is responsible for his organisation.
FEMA fucks up royally, in everything from its response to the New Orleans disaster to stupid piddling stuff like unnecessarily rejecting non IE-browsers on its website (which, nevertheless, can cause additional hassle and stress for people already destitute, financially ruined and recently-bereaved).
Damn straight Bush should carry the can for the whole fuck-up. He should resign, step down or be impeached for fucking the country until it can't respond to a simple natural disaster that everyone saw coming hours or days (weeks?) away. Not to start a right vs. left flamewar, but frankly I wouldn't be averse to seeing him do jail-time for the damage he's caused to your country.
The director of FEMA should resign immediately, since he's proven himself unable to do his job. He should emphatically not just be "golden parachuted" or shifted to another sinecure. He fucked up, let him find a new bloody job.
The guy responsible for the retarded website policy should have his knuckles rapped. He should have known better, and he's likely caused a lot of extra hassle for the last people in the country who need extra shit right now.
See, if you can't hold bosses responsible for the actions of their subordinates, what the fuck kind of restraints are there on them?
Re:I'll buy that... for a millionth of a cent (Score:5, Insightful)
And just as a side note, if I'm ever in a disaster the size and scope of which requires me to contact FEMA, my first thought is not going to be "Oh gee I better check their website". I know it's 2005 and all but in that situation I'm still going to want to talk to a live person.
Re:Actually, no (Score:5, Insightful)
If someone else tells him. If he happens to poke around in any way, and finds something that seems odd. If anyone remotely technical apart from you looks at the work, who doesn't:
i) Already agree the guy's a fuckwit
ii) Already know you lied to him and covered it up
iii) Agree it's ok to lie to your boss, and
iv) Have nothing to gain by showing the boss he's been lied to.
Once he gets suspicious you have to lie again to cover that. And at the very least he's going to be suspicious from now on, so you're less likely to get away with anything (possibly, more important) in the future.
Basically, once you lie to him once, you'd better be fucking sure he's never, ever going to find out about it. See my earlier point about "it'll never happen" scenarios
"2) If it works, why will he bother?"
Some people place a higher priority on "being obeyed" than on "things working".
They probably justify it to themselves that if they can't trust the employee to do whatever you want, no matter how insane, pointless or counter-productive, then you can't trust the employee, period.
The people are generally paranoid, uneducated in the relevant field, prone to micromanagement, fucking control freaks, and, overwhelmingly, bosses.
"3) You'll give yourself an ulcer if you keep bending over like that"
Well, no ulcers yet, but several bald patches on my head from tearing hair out, yes.
"4) If you let the insane define reality, then your reality will be insane"
Oh, do you work here? What are the odds?
"5) NEVER get into a position where you *need* the job. Build up, save a little, keep within your means and you can kiss a stupid job goodbye (note: if you get sacked because you didn't apply the required solution, but still got the result, you will get severance and dole)."
That's a lovely idea, but unfortunately, with the state of higher education in the UK, you're lucky to come out of your first degree without at least a £10,000 debt. A good first job in computing in my area is £16,000-£18,000. It can take a long while to dig yourself out of the hole, and you'd better quickly get used to getting fucked in the arse on the way...
Also, a note: I don't know where you're from, but here in the UK disobeying any reasonable request from your boss can easily end up as "Gross Misconduct". Getting sacked is also no guarantee you'll immediately get the dole, and the dole doesn't cover things like a car (essential to find a new job), university loan repayments, lack of a recent reference for your CV, etc.
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
However, this doens't mean that there's no value in doing the job right as opposed to botching it/cutting down your options and having to redo it again later.
Re: your example, many people (myself included) find it faster and easier to hand-code HTML and write perl than to learn and use proprietary tools.
For example, from sufficient practice I'd be happy to bet I could knock up a web form in Perl/XHTML/CSS in about the same time you could do one in Visual Studio. The thing is, by the time I'd finished, the code would be leaner, download faster, be ranked higher by search engines (a very real consideration when doing marketing websites), and would work on any browser right down to smartphones.
If there's then an unforeseen requirement (like opening your interface to the world), who's in the bettr position? The guy who took some extra time but who can now go live without any changes, or the guy who now has to re-implement his entire solution (your estimated time: weeks), in addition to the time he spent hacking it together in the first place?
Obviously it's a trade-off, but I still firmly believe the judgement call should be made by the guy who's trained and qualified to make such a call, not someone who is neither, but is nevertheless in a position of authority over them.
You're familiar with the saying: "Faster, Better, Cheaper: Choose any two"?
Bosses (in my experience) invariably choose Faster and Cheaper, because it delivers short-term gains and requires no knowledge of the problem.
Engineers prioritise Better, because while you don't get Faster up-front, ultimately you get Better, Cheaper and Faster, if the requirements change even a little bit during the entire usage-lifetime of the code.
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hollan's Law: the likelihood of something happening is directly proportional to the degree of insistence that it won't.
We've also had one "it'll never happen" situation where I did actually give in...
Look, your job is to make it work, the way you were told. If it doesn't, it is your fault. That's why he's the boss and you aren't: if you are in a "right to work" state, you can be fired for any reason, including the boss's stupidity. It is best to try to find a better job and quit before this happens. Been there, done that.
Never disobey your boss on technical matters, even when he has no fucking clue what he's babbling about. That's how you get fired.
No, you will get fired if it doesn't work. With a moron for a boss, you are in a no-win situation. Leave, or at least plan to leave. It is better to leave on your terms than his.
bad timing (Score:2, Insightful)
That being said, I don't understand how it is that a simple form could not have been quickly created using generic technology just to capture the information required. A day or two? I call strawman to their excuse that it was an internal application that fails them; clearly it was a choice that fails them. A choice made under duress, admittedly. But duress due -again- to being *unprepared*.
I would think that the scenario is obvious since 9/11, so having had several years to prepare, this situation is most egregious. Unfathomable. Unconscionable.
Not wanting to
Re:you know... (Score:2, Insightful)
It might have even been an outpouring of knowledgeable tech folks that could offer some assistance in fixing some of these problems.
It's nice to imagine the OSS community swooping in to save the day at a time like this, because the OSS community is people, citizens, aka the basis of our country and the (supposed) true holders of the power.
Re:I'll buy that... for a millionth of a cent (Score:3, Insightful)
You and the other several hundred thousand people like you, in this case. Problem is there aren't 6-7 digits of FEMA employees to talk back to you.
That's what websites are for, isn't it? Hey what if I took my laptop and portable hotspot down to reunion center and volunteered a few hours to get people registered, etc.
Oh. can't. 'Cause I use fedora and firefox. Can't submit html forms.
Can we share ANY blame with Lousianna? (Score:5, Insightful)
The Levee maintenance program has been "underfunded" for THREE decades. Every federal program is "underfunded," because people ask for the world, get something, and can now claim to have been underfunded.
It is NOT clear that if that $250m was restored to the Federal budget that the levees would have held. We have NO IDEA. But when the levees and a system designed for Category 3 Hurricanes gets hit with a slow moving Category 4, better maintenance PROBABLY WOULD NOT have mattered.
Louisiana/New Orleans have a Levee Maintenance Board that is supposed to maintain and improve the Levees. They can issue municipal bonds to pay for it (those lovely options that cities and states have that pay a lower interest rate than treasuries, because the interest is federal tax free, so the government picks up a third of the interest tab in terms of your rate being lower by a third). However, in typical Louisiana corruption, it was filled with political friends with NO INTEREST in Levees, and focused on casinos.
Further, FEMA is EXTREMELY powerful, which makes civil libertarians nervous. Here you have an executive branch department that can single-handedly declare martial law, basically suspend the constitution, etc., powers normally only available to Congress in wartime. The CHECK on government abuse is that a city or state MUST request that help. Now, in an ideal world, FEMA would ONLY be called in REAL emergencies (but when you declare an emergency, FEMA picks up 80% of the tab, so anytime you can you declare an emergency), but federal programs only work when they expand, not only act 1-4 times a decade.
The evacuation of New Orleans was the city's responsibility and the city's PLAN called for using school buses to evacuate people... why didn't this happen?
Notifying FEMA of where shelter's are is a LOCAL responsibility, because FEMA doesn't come in until AFTER there is an emergency. The Superdome is a lovely batch of embarrassment. FEMA learned through official channels 2 or 3 days in that there were people there with no food and water. The news-media was floored "don't you have a television." But as sad as this is, it kinda makes sense... You have some level of lower down FEMA officials going over their checklist, and the Superdome isn't on it, so it is ignored. The higher ups are watching the Superdome footage on TV thinking "those poor people, at least help is on the way." But a disconnect there completely makes sense, and is extremely tragic. Whoever is on the ground sees that it isn't on their list and assumes that it is someone else's. Those above that see it isn't getting help assume that it is on someone's list... More people die... I place the bame 70%-30%, 70% on local officials who didn't notify FEMA properly, and 30% Fed's, because when you see the media talking about people there being without food or medicine for 2-3 days, you call down the pipe until you find out who is responsible for it. The media attention could have made it possible to save lives, if someone thought outside the box.
Decades of mismanagement and corruption in Louisiana caused a catastrophe... Bush is apparently a COMPLETELY incompetent leader who can't get anyone good in the government... This situation sucks. But I'm sick of the partisanship on this... Plenty of stupidity goes around.
BTW: more has been spent on Levee's by the Feds in the 5 years that Bush has been in office than the 8 years that Clinton was in office. That doesn't mean anything, but this "Bush wanted to levees to break so he cut funding" doesn't match reality. I'm pretty sure that the leader of the free world wasn't personally overseeing levee maintenance... unfortunately, neither was the levee maintenance board...
Alex
Re:you know... (Score:2, Insightful)
Not only that; be proactive about keeping the other idiots out of their way so they can do their job. You will be considered a god by the techies you manage.
Re:Wow. (Score:3, Insightful)
The term "penny wise and pound foolish" comes to mind regarding both the optional (and ill-advised, ill-timed, and poorly executed) war in Iraq, AND this administration's focus on reducing Federal expenditures on American infrastructure in favor of tax cuts to their cronies. Failure to spend $500 million USD in a timely manner on the levee system has resulted in a recovery & reconstruction effort that will ultimately cost $250 billion USD.
While no price can be placed on the tragic loss of life in New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, you can be fairly certain that far more Democrats than Republicans expired. One subsidiary of Haliburton, KBR, has already snagged contracts from DHS/FEMA for recovery & reconstruction efforts even now. As the GOP might say "Always look for the silver lining
Re:you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Try again. Your job is to obey the guy signing your pay-cheques. If that's what the guy signing the pay-cheques thinks, any disagreement on your part (even for the greater good) will quickly result in no pay-cheques any more.
"No, you will get fired if it doesn't work. With a moron for a boss, you are in a no-win situation. Leave, or at least plan to leave. It is better to leave on your terms than his."
I dunno - in my experience it's better to argue firmly and sensibly with the stupid decision then abide by it - if the worst comes to the worst you can always cite your objections and claim you were "only obeying orders".
If you go off and do your own thing, even if it succeeds, you haven't proven that the boss's approach wouldn't have. Therefore you have definitely disobeyed an order for a possible better outcome. This leaves you no excuse and no way of demonstrating (to non-techncal people who really don't want to listen) that it would have gone wrong in the first place.
Plus, y'know, there's a certain evil sense of satisfaction in sitting back, doing what you're told and watching it all go to shit... <:-)
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
"Workers" (programmers, sweat-shop labourers, etc) produce actual products for the company. Selling (/renting/leasing) these products makes the company rich.
I think everyone can agree that Managers don't directly produce anything - instead they're there to manage the people who do, hence the name "manager".
Surely, therefore, the job of a manager is to do everything he can to allow his workers to work (including procuring the resources they need from upper management, and taking decisions the employee needs answered), and otherwise to stay the hell out of their way.
So how do we end up in the situation where most managers I've met seem to take it as read that:
1) They know better than their employees
2) They can (and should) tell their employees how to do a job the manager has never done, or even understands
3) They should interfere in a project that's already going well, and expect their instructions to be heeded and followed, even when the employee knows better
Surely the role of "manager" should be like a good butler - there when you need them, and invisible when you don't. How have we ended up with so many wannabe-Napoleons that the very expectations of the role are now so warped?
Re:Woman calls FEMA and gets runaround (Score:3, Insightful)
But mainly because it isn't necessarily true. If there is a fixed budget for "government" (being all governments, local, state and federal), then one agency will have a smaller set of resources, but better developed (and since there are rarely multiple disasters at the same time, this is the most efficient setup). The many little agencies will have to have massive amounts of duplication. All the budget for the nation's emergency response will be eaten up by thousands of command vehicles and generators that are spread around the country and all too small to handle something as large as an entire city being flooded for weeks. So, you'll spend the same to get much less. Also, a city can't call up the Guard, demand other nearby areas send help (though the help would be more of the same and not specialized gear). FEMA is supposed to have the capability to mobilize greater resources than the city and state could muster. FEMA is supposed to be able to coordinate local, state, regional and national response. FEMA is supposed to be able to prepare and respond to disasters like New Orleans. The local responses are not capable of responding, even with twice the budget of FEMA being given back to the states for that purpose. That FEMA failed in its task isn't indicative of them not being capable of acting. It is indicative of politics and image being more important than action. FEMA had the capability, the resources, and the authority to save thousands of lives that were lost. FEMA is a good idea that was implemented poorly.
Re:You knew it was coming... (Score:3, Insightful)
And for that matter, you seem to have no problem speaking for the entire planet. Who died and left you in charge of global diplomacy?
Re:You knew it was coming... (Score:3, Insightful)
In America, however, events which should make decent people blush with shame get ignored as "fratboy pranks" and covered up.
Now I know there are decent Americans. I have good friends who are Americans. But the American people on the whole are not ashamed of the disgraceful actions of their government. Before the reelection we could say "The government might be bad, but the American people aren't like that". But apparently they are, or they wouldn't have reelected Bush.
Now not everything Bush has done has been idiotic. The decision to overthrow the Taliban was right, and your allies backed you up on it. There are French and Canadian troops in Afghanistan right now. But Iraq? If you had waited for the UN inspection to complete, you probably would still have had your allies with you. Saddam is an evil man. But you rushed to war for stupid reasons (WMD? Al Qeada? All bogus.) and what's more, it's looking like you've done the whole thing to benefit the ayatollahs. The whole Iraq war has been bungled from soup to nuts. And you (collectively) won't demand an accounting for it. To question the President is to give comfort to terrorists. Until the people act to repudiate the foolish actions of their government, you will continue to lose the respect and goodwill of the international community.
This is, of course, my own opinion. If I spoke for the world, I wouldn't be wasting my time arguing on Slashdot. And when I speak of the actions of Americans, I speak of the actions of the elected government of the United States. All clear?
-aiabx
Re:I'll buy that... for a millionth of a cent (Score:3, Insightful)
> contact FEMA, my first thought is not going to be "Oh gee I better check
> their website".
Tell that to the folks filling our public labs the last week. All I have to say is "Thank God for Crossover Office" or I'd be up to my behind in demands to load up Windows XP on our machines. Which would be exactly what Microsoft intended with this stunt. Call me paranoid, but I don't think this was an accident for a millisecond. These are the guys who throw chairs and scream "I'm goinna &$#*ing kill Google." This is exactly how they 'compete.'
Re:you know... (Score:3, Insightful)
Decisions, decisions... would be better to run the government on the flip of a coin....
Follow the money (Score:3, Insightful)
> New York Times criticizing the earlier form of his budget
So? Since when did the NYT have any control over the budget of the federal government?
The buck stops where the control rests; bringing in irrelevant parties---whether they're the NYT or Santa Claus---doesn't change who is responsible for cutting New Orleans levee funding.
I don't care WHO'S responsible.... (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm from southern Ontario.
I do care about some things, though.
I care about people. This is something I've not read about much on here. Like it or not, Slashdot readers/posters seem to be a bit of a-lacking when it comes to communal feelings. Assholes, I'd call it.
I'd like to take the time to thank the poeple that are saving the animals. I'm not a Noah, but I respect the task that they're doing, and recognize the risk that's involved. Kudos to them, and most gracious thanks to their work.
I'd also like to send out thanks to everyone else who isn't in the disaster zone, who is helping out with arms-outstretched, to help those in need of some caring, some basic human comfort. If you're a person, we need you to survive, and I've been there, arms wide open. It's a generous thing, to have gone through such a struggle, and emerge intact. We need your stories, not for the root cause of survival, but for the sustaining that your stories give us. Tell us about it, and make our meagre lives better.
the real issue (Score:1, Insightful)
What really strikes me about FEMA is their total lack of consideration for people that are most likely to need their help, i.e. poor people. Forget this whole IE-only/web-standards thing. The real issue is FEMA being lazy about making assistance available to poor people.
1. First of all there are no paper applications. In a disaster that knocked out power to hundreds of thousands of people and primarily affected the poorest people in the country, THE ONLY way to apply for federal aid is through the FEMA website. FEMA MUST realize that most of the people in the most need of aid either can't access a computer or have never used one before. We've been helping people fill out their FEMA applications because 90% of the people are computer illiterate and would not have been able to apply for aid if we had not been there to help them.
2. About 15-25% of the time, the FEMA website's servers are overloaded. 100% of the time the FEMA phone line is unavailable. (They don't even put you on hold; they just hang up after a recorded message.) Buy some more fucking server time. Train some more fucking phone operators.
3. So a guy from FEMA--only ONE guy came for ONE day to serve 2000 people--actually came to the Coliseum and all he did was scatter some orange fliers with the address of the FEMA website and the FEMA phone number. When we asked him about some problems we've been having with the application, he was equally clueless. For instance, the FEMA application requires a current phone number, but obviously most people at the Coliseum don't have one. So the FEMA dude said they should enter their cell phone number. Most of these people don't have any form of insurance or even a bank account. How the hell do they expect them to have a cell phone?
For me, this whole hurricane thing has made it more obvious how racism and classism in American is sustatined through this kind of indifference and ignorance. Equality isn't treating everybody the same way; it's putting an equal amount of effort in recognizing and addressing everybody's unique needs.
~John Y.