PDA

View Full Version : Cost for 1 website = $18,000,000.00


mdvaden
07-10-2009, 12:03 AM
The Cost for 1 website = $18,000,000.00 courtesy of the Obama administration.

Can you imagine ??


:hammerhead::hammerhead::hammerhead::hammerhead:

Here is one link:

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/07/09/one-web-site-18000000/

Note the comment "one freaking website".

If the page changes, you can Google and find plenty of references.

topsites
07-11-2009, 12:59 AM
Yeah but, have you ever even attempted to build, say a functional search box?
Granted, one can download the perl backbone for most any type of search engine
and then all one would have to do is modify it to fit the application, but have you
ever looked at the CODE?!

Imagine if you would, building a database that tracks every facet of government spending,
from the tiniest burg on through the county level and every state and then all the way to
the big house, don't forget this has to include every last government agency, even Vdot and DMV.
Then, make it so that people can search that, by location, date, and it would be nice if folks
could peruse by category too, don't forget navigation.

18m might sound like a lot but go on and drop it all on a server, install, test, the whole nine yards,
oh and it has to be secure, there WILL be hacking attempts.

...These folks with their news ought to stick to reporting the facts, I don't particularly care for the editorial opinions.

topsites
07-11-2009, 01:12 AM
Just the search engine, a search box looks so simple...
But behind that rests software that collects the data and drops it in a database,
the same software then can also retrieve said data anytime a search is performed.

... I'm not sure if this is the right thing, but it would look something like this (it scrolls down a ways):
http://www.koders.com/java/fid69C02A43615DAD2B6038F479EC8C8082C7E66FD9.aspx?s=search+engine#L56
That's just for the backbone of a search engine, and I believe that one is small and hence not that functional,
I've seen perl code 10 thousand plus lines long, it's just ridiculous even thinking of fooling with that.

Real time now, we want to see this here government spending data up to date!

You know I'm just saying, it's going to take a lot of folks a lot of work to launch this one little Web site.
And maybe 18m is too much, but I ain't making that decision.

mikey.hill
07-15-2009, 05:54 AM
I'm just going to go out on a limb here and assume that you have no idea the amount of engineering and complexity that is involved in developing a functioning website. You see, often times people have the misconception that a simple task is very simple, but just as often they are wrong. Case in point - reach down and tie your shoes, but while your tying them think about what each step involves. Not just put the left string over your right, but try to think from the standpoint of a robot. Not only do you have to define movements, i.e. move this muscle, rotate this joint, grasp the string with this amount of pressure - you also need to define parameters, limits not to mention underlying factors such as blood flow bone density. These may seem very mundane but they are infact very relevant and failure of one of these functions could result in the failure to be able to complete a simple task of tying ones shoes. Now I know you might be thinking, a web application is not a robot nor is it a human; but the way they work are very much alike.

I'm a professional apps developer. I work for large startups as well as consult on major projects including several open source projects. I know what is involved here so let me just give you a very incomplete list.

1. UI - what's wrong with the current site. How do we fix it. How do we create a site that is simple to use but effective and efficient. User testing - Refactor - User testing - complete
2. Database design - this isn't a mom and pop ecommerce site they're building. This is a system designed and built to scale to an obscene amount of users. Think facebook - then multiply that by 10. Now assuming that the existing data isn't in some obscure format we have to somehow build a new revolutionary system and then tie that data into everything else. And - we have to do it so it's fast. A simple ms of extra processing time adds up to millions of dollars worth of wasted bandwidth, energy and overall ability to function over the period of a year.(think google - by removing the closing </body></html> tags from their very basic search page they save approx. 30tb of data transfer per day).
3. System architecture - again, design a system to not only be functional but scalable and available 24x7 using secure and proven technologies. This kind of page isn't going up on your friends lunarpages shared hosting account. Think fully operational datacenter with redundant power supplies, backups, efficient and adequate cooling, security, proper equipment and multiple connections. Not cheap - last I checked myspace's monthly internet bill was in the millions.
4. Now build the application to put it all together. As a developer myself, I can tell you that a good developer will make in the range of 80 - 100k per year. Now factor in things like project management so the programmers can program, frontend guys can do their thing and design guys can provide the necessary supported needed. Now that you've built that, translate it to every major language and btw it needs to be W3C and 508 compatible. My last site was a fairly basic site for a national recruiting agency. The company itself consisted of about 20 local agencies all with their own page, employment info, job listings etc... After all was said and done we ended up with about 200k lines of code. Some generated from our framework, some for orm information and some from js frameworks and other fringe aspects but a bulk of that was our code.

So that's a brief rundown of what it takes to build a site like this and i'm not even touching on things like security, QA testing and such. TBO 18mil sounds low for this type of project. Paypal, which we've all used and seems to be a fairly simple operation went through around 250mil before they even turned a profit. I know of course this isn't a for profit site - but I'm just saying, there is so much more that has to happen than most people, even most web developers ever understand. As a side note I have a very close relative that this site will be targeted towards. I've seen first hand the frustrations of dealing with what currently available and it is NOT adequate for this situation. Obama is actually doing something very smart and I personally believe will lower the overall cost of dealing with these current problems rather than sticking to traditional scatter methods which have proven costly inefficient and frustrating to both the users and administrators.

mikey.hill
07-15-2009, 06:08 AM
Just wanted to note in the above post I misrepresented the number of facebook users(actually est. to be 200 mil) which is approx. the amount that this system will service over its lifecycle.

mdvaden
07-15-2009, 07:32 PM
I'm just going to go out on a limb here and assume that you have no idea the amount of engineering and complexity that is involved in developing a functioning website.

Yep ...

You went out on a limb. I know what websites can cost.

There is no real need to waste $18,000,000 dollars on a website that most likely could be eliminated altogether.

Just one more California-Like waste where money that we don't have is spent. That's exactly the path California went down.

mikey.hill
07-15-2009, 08:00 PM
Yep ...

You went out on a limb. I know what websites can cost.

There is no real need to waste $18,000,000 dollars on a website that most likely could be eliminated altogether.

Just one more California-Like waste where money that we don't have is spent. That's exactly the path California went down.

Tell you what. You list a few websites and what you think they cost and I'll stop you when you're out of your league.

lifetree
07-15-2009, 08:51 PM
... maybe 18m is too much, but I ain't making that decision.

Well, I have to agree that $ 18 M is just another example of the "change" agent (i.e.-Obama) spending money without regard to tax payor interests !!

mikey.hill
07-15-2009, 09:25 PM
Well, I have to agree that $ 18 M is just another example of the "change" agent (i.e.-Obama) spending money without regard to tax payor interests !!

This thread obviously has nothing to do with the issues at hand but personal views on our President and the people you and I elected into office. Republican, democrat, independent ... yadayadayada... go post this garbage in the political discussions.

lifetree
07-15-2009, 09:52 PM
This thread obviously has nothing to do with the issues at hand ...

It has everything to do with the issues at hand ... he said he was going to "spend our money wisely" !! I hardly call this a wise expenditure.

mdvaden
07-15-2009, 10:01 PM
It has everything to do with the issues at hand ... he said he was going to "spend our money wisely" !! I hardly call this a wise expenditure.

You tell him lifetree....

He's only got 50 some odd posts under his name. I'll nominate you for knowing how much latitude and flexibility we have for posting on Lawnsite - LOL.

I figure why not a bit of variety in a website forum.

mikey.hill
07-15-2009, 10:05 PM
You contradicting yourself by the very fact that you are using this site to inform yourself and actuate conversation that is beneficial to your business. This is the very purpose or recovery.org. To inform ... the public ... on expenditures ... so that ... the model .... of efficiency ... is put .... under .... public .... scrutiny ... so that .... people like you ... who obviously ... have a stick ... up their ass ... might have ... a chance ... at a better ... life ... and a more ... secure future ...

mikey.hill
07-15-2009, 10:43 PM
You tell him lifetree....

He's only got 50 some odd posts under his name. I'll nominate you for knowing how much latitude and flexibility we have for posting on Lawnsite - LOL.

I figure why not a bit of variety in a website forum.

^^ yes my expertise as well as yours is defined upon the number of posts one has on a site for LCO's. I guess the internet really does make everyone an expert.

mdvaden
07-16-2009, 01:07 AM
^^ yes my expertise as well as yours is defined upon the number of posts one has on a site for LCO's. I guess the internet really does make everyone an expert.

Exactly why the 18 million dollar website is a big piece of internet bohunkus. You just said it yourself, and cut your previous talking point off at the knees.

About the only thing we could ascertain through our congressman, would be that the site stuffed someone's pockets with 180 million deflating US dollars. Even if they put up a website, who across the country could ever verify the accuracy of the statistics, or whether is was propaganda.

It's a waste. And a bit contrast to a productive website owned by a landscape busines owner who can afford the content.

mikey.hill
07-16-2009, 01:42 AM
Exactly why the 18 million dollar website is a big piece of internet bohunkus. You just said it yourself, and cut your previous talking point off at the knees.

About the only thing we could ascertain through our congressman, would be that the site stuffed someone's pockets with 180 million deflating US dollars. Even if they put up a website, who across the country could ever verify the accuracy of the statistics, or whether is was propaganda.

It's a waste. And a bit contrast to a productive website owned by a landscape busines owner who can afford the content.

Are you drunk or something? Nothing you just said made absolutely any sense much like many of the things you said before. Thats the beauty of public scrutiny(trust but verify). You are chasing a dream buddy, so keep being paranoid and go put a foil hat on. When you decide to come back down to reality and start being part of the solution-not just a sheeple I'll be here to listen. It's very clear through this one posting that you're extremely one sided. You're not willing to look at the broad perspective of this money being spent and you would rather pick a random topic, take a random side and stick to it no minds to the logic of your position.

If your so concerned about the government spending of funds in the IT sector why have you not posted up anything about the many US government sites that have been under constant attack since july 4th? Or about the constant viruses that have plagued the CIA/DoD or any of the other institutions in the US that have cost us hundreds of millions of dollars. But it's guys like you who insist that it's a waste of money... ***** about it till you get your way, then complain even worse when what we warned you would happen actually happens.

mdvaden
07-16-2009, 11:30 AM
mikey.hill does not seem to understand the replies by others.

Can someone explain to him more clearly?

JDUtah
07-19-2009, 12:11 PM
Obama says he embraces public scrutiny but then wants to take our guns away, and him be the one in charge of the only remaining defense force (which he doesn't even honor or respect). I have to say BS on this website as well. You might not understand how the 2nd amendment ties in, but it does... it is the ONLY way we can hold our governments power in check and accountable to us as citizens.

Anyways, Obama doesn't want scrutiny or public accountability otherwise he would have let his first stimulus package be read before voted on. Oh and stimulus package number 2. Oh and the healthcare plan. Oh man, if you ask me this website (including the big price tag) is just a propaganda move which he hopes takes the public's eye of of the non-accountable control tactics he is using... and getting away with.

I agree, spend that 18 mill on other things, like to pay off 5% of his first irresponsible, un-scrutinized, and non-accountable fiasco called the stimulus package.

I also agree with mdvaden, there is no way that the information on that site could be considered accurate, or even true. Look at the way Obama has done things already, and if you expect him to truly intend to be accountable (through this website or any means) you are a fool IMO. I would say expecting Obama to be accountable is the real dream chasing. He is pure politician, and he played America hard. Again with this website, he is playing them even more IMO. The sad part is... we deserve what we get, we voted the people who voted him in. It is our own freaking fault.

topsites
07-21-2009, 11:47 PM
All right I will agree that yes, for 18m it probably could be a Web site we can do without.
If such was the point, my apologies, I simply thought the point was that it's too much for the job...
Which it may or may not be, but anyhow.

tinman
07-29-2009, 09:19 PM
Yeah but, have you ever even attempted to build, say a functional search box?
Granted, one can download the perl backbone for most any type of search engine
and then all one would have to do is modify it to fit the application, but have you
ever looked at the CODE?!

Imagine if you would, building a database that tracks every facet of government spending,
from the tiniest burg on through the county level and every state and then all the way to
the big house, don't forget this has to include every last government agency, even Vdot and DMV.
Then, make it so that people can search that, by location, date, and it would be nice if folks
could peruse by category too, don't forget navigation.

18m might sound like a lot but go on and drop it all on a server, install, test, the whole nine yards,
oh and it has to be secure, there WILL be hacking attempts.

...These folks with their news ought to stick to reporting the facts, I don't particularly care for the editorial opinions.
Basically they were just adding data to the site though. A watchdog group has a similar site that tracks teh sepending and built it for 600K . Offered to license it to the feds but I guess it was too reasonable. lol

tinman
07-29-2009, 09:25 PM
Are you drunk or something? Nothing you just said made absolutely any sense much like many of the things you said before. Thats the beauty of public scrutiny(trust but verify). You are chasing a dream buddy, so keep being paranoid and go put a foil hat on. When you decide to come back down to reality and start being part of the solution-not just a sheeple I'll be here to listen. It's very clear through this one posting that you're extremely one sided. You're not willing to look at the broad perspective of this money being spent and you would rather pick a random topic, take a random side and stick to it no minds to the logic of your position.

If your so concerned about the government spending of funds in the IT sector why have you not posted up anything about the many US government sites that have been under constant attack since july 4th? Or about the constant viruses that have plagued the CIA/DoD or any of the other institutions in the US that have cost us hundreds of millions of dollars. But it's guys like you who insist that it's a waste of money... ***** about it till you get your way, then complain even worse when what we warned you would happen actually happens.
What is the worse that could happen if the stimulus site was hacked?? No one cares. They already went against tax payers wishes when it was passed (Bush did it and Obama as well and congress critters.... no left right junk with me)

punt66
07-29-2009, 09:29 PM
My wife is a IT consultant. They reorganize large companies and government computer systems by writing and implementing custom software. These projects can take several years and start at 5 million up to a few hundred million. Many times their firm goes over budget and loses their profit. Its a TON of work. It gives jobs and keeps our progress going forward.

mikey.hill
07-29-2009, 10:04 PM
What is the worse that could happen if the stimulus site was hacked?? No one cares. They already went against tax payers wishes when it was passed (Bush did it and Obama as well and congress critters.... no left right junk with me)

Not that it's the greatest concern(I was referencing the other IT issues because they are just examples of money that could have been saved through proper prevention) but yes very bad things can happen. Recently there was server company that had been hacked and they weren't aware of it until several months later. The hackers installed scripts that tricked website visitors into entering SS's CC's etc... After all was said and done they est. that the group responsible made away with close to 1/2 a million CC's and info. This was a well known but small server company that this happened to so imagine the fallout if something like this were to happen. Not to mention the amount of data that's at stake. Earlier someone posted about a watchdog group that offered to sell their site for 600k and the offer was refused. I guarantee you there is no way a non-gov't agency especially a watchdog group will have access to the amount of data that will be pulled into this site. To someone somewhere that data is very valuable and there are more than enough people willing to attempt to get it. The cost just to secure that data will be astronomical itself.

tinman
07-29-2009, 10:16 PM
Not that it's the greatest concern(I was referencing the other IT issues because they are just examples of money that could have been saved through proper prevention) but yes very bad things can happen. Recently there was server company that had been hacked and they weren't aware of it until several months later. The hackers installed scripts that tricked website visitors into entering SS's CC's etc... After all was said and done they est. that the group responsible made away with close to 1/2 a million CC's and info. This was a well known but small server company that this happened to so imagine the fallout if something like this were to happen. Not to mention the amount of data that's at stake. Earlier someone posted about a watchdog group that offered to sell their site for 600k and the offer was refused. I guarantee you there is no way a non-gov't agency especially a watchdog group will have access to the amount of data that will be pulled into this site. To someone somewhere that data is very valuable and there are more than enough people willing to attempt to get it. The cost just to secure that data will be astronomical itself.

Good point on securing it so visitors don't get jacked up. The watchdog group had the same data according to the article i read.