ENOUGH already. The website **IS** working

[BlueStreak]

If I hear another supposed Democratic say "once the Website starts working after the end of November ..." I may have to shoot myself.

The website had a bad two weeks where it was essentially non-functional. Performance was horrible. You couldn't get through the registration process without a bunch of errors. If you finally did get an account created, you couldn't get policy information to display consistently. And essential information, such as the provider networks, was broken.

But that stuff is all fixed now. You most certainly CAN use the site to get any details you want about any of the policies and you can use it to enroll.

Yes, it is still a crappy design. The worst part, I think, is that there is a "See plans now" button that ostensibly lets you see the plans without having to create an account. Except that the information is completely bogus. You cannot see the plans that actually are correct for your circumstances, and for most people, that grossly underestimates the cost of the real plans. Moreover all you can see is a summary, which is worthless.

But if a person is willing to go through the ordeal (a 30-minute process) of creating an account, the website works fine.

We need to get yahoos like Ed Shultz and basically everybody else to stop saying the site isn't working. It is working and probably isn't going to get much better from this point.

[Demo_Chris]

1. According the the HHS Sec, they can process 17K aps a DAY

Or about what one would expect from a 1970's Casio Watch / Calculator.

She apparently thought this was pretty spiffy, and was boasting about it during her hearing with congress.

[scheming daemons]

6. No... she said 17000 aps per HOUR.... you are willfully lying

She said it many times. 17000 applications per *HOUR*.

[Demo_Chris]

13. You are correct, I confused her statement with her tech expert...

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/sebelius-faces-more-questions-health-law-8C11542596

Tavenner says the site is being fixed and says it can handle 17,000 people a day now.

In any case, 5 per second is pathetic as well.

[BlueStreak]

15. This is ENROLLMENTS, not transactions

For every enrollment there are thousands of window-shopping transactions. And even when one goes to complete the enrollment process, that is a flurry of transactions. Saying "5 per second is pathetic" is, well, pathetic. How many reservations per second do you think Hertz.com does? How many orders per second do you think that bestbuy.com completes?

[Demo_Chris]

17. I don't know about Hertz, but I do know about...

ONLINE GAMES.

Take, for example, a game like Eve Online for which the numbers are readily available. As I type this there are currently 40,160 people from all over the world playing this game. All of them are on one non-instanced game world, all are continuously streaming information to and from the servers, and all expect microsecond response times, at all times, without fail. And it cannot fail or slow, because at any given monent thousands of these players might be gathered in mass battles against each other flying pretend spaceships sometimes worth hundreds of real world dollars each. When they blow up the money is gone, so they damn well better not blow up due to some server failure.

Eve Online, run by CCP games, a small gaming company out of Iceland, can simultaniously handle massive data from 40,000 plus people, every second, continuously, while the hundred million dollar "Obamacare Online" website can handle 17,000 per hour -- and most of that 17,000 is not simultaniously transmitting anything, they are filling out forms. And it gets worse... where Eve Online has to accomodate all of these people on a single server (everyone must be able to interact with each other), the Obamacare website can subdivide people into as many servers as they need.

And of course, Eve isn't even a BIG game. It's only got 500K subscribers. I believe World of Warcraft is the largest, with about 10 Million subscribers. WOW has more people playing their game every day than the Obamacare websites are expected to handle over this three month crash enrollment period.

Everyone involved in this hundred-million dollar debacle, including the HHS Sec, should be out on their ass.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

[BlueStreak]

21. That is not the same as orders per second

That is just the number of users considered to be "active" at the moment. They are not necessarily driving any significant transaction load on the server.

17,000 per hour is a perfectly workable throughput rate for this application at this stage, as long as error situations are handled correctly (which was not happened the first two weeks of the launch). As I said before, there will be a crush of traffic in late March, so the 17,000 / hour capacity might not be adequate at that time, but there are over three months to streamline the efficiency.

Have you even tried to use the system in the past 10 days or do you just like to repeat right-wing talking points?

There are still some problems with the system, but they aren't the ones you are talking about. They stuff you are talking about is simply not a problem today.

[jeff47]

24. So much wrong in one post.

All of them are on one non-instanced game world

Actually, every star system is an "instance". At least, it's functionally equivalent to an instance in other MMOs - the players are not directly connected to anyone in another system. They only receive messages from other systems via chat or mail.

all are continuously streaming information to and from the servers

Nope, there's a sampling rate. You can see it if you get to experience the joy of a major alliance v alliance war.

And it cannot fail or slow, because at any given monent thousands of these players might be gathered in mass battles against each other flying pretend spaceships sometimes worth hundreds of real world dollars each.

Um....no. In an actual 0.0 war, you can be sitting there mashing the "fire" button for minutes before something actually happens.

When they blow up the money is gone, so they damn well better not blow up due to some server failure.

Yeah, it's not like something like that caused the first titan kill or anything.

And it gets worse... where Eve Online has to accomodate all of these people on a single server (everyone must be able to interact with each other), the Obamacare website can subdivide people into as many servers as they need.

It's not actually a single server. It's multiple servers running in a cluster. They move systems around on the servers based on load. One physical server will handle a few low-population systems. Jita and systems in a 0.0 war are put on their own servers. The game just doesn't tell you when jumping through a gate is connecting to a new physical server.

I believe World of Warcraft is the largest, with about 10 Million subscribers

Which has so many separate servers and massive amounts of instancing, thus damaging the argument you were trying to make in the previous paragraphs.

[Demo_Chris]

25. Response...

Actually, every star system is an "instance". At least, it's functionally equivalent to an instance in other MMOs - the players are not directly connected to anyone in another system. They only receive messages from other systems via chat or mail.

Unlike other MMOs there is only ONE instance, rather than numerous copies and more created as needed. If you and I both go to Jita, we will both ALWAYS be in the same location.

Nope, there's a sampling rate. You can see it if you get to experience the joy of a major alliance v alliance war.

Which does nothing to address my point. In an MMO the clients and servers are essentially continuously streaming information to each other -- in some cases comparatively large quantities of information. When applying at Helathcare.gov the client fills out a form -- which might take minutes -- then hits enter to send the information.

Um....no. In an actual 0.0 war, you can be sitting there mashing the "fire" button for minutes before something actually happens.

Not anymore. The new code handles this stuff very well. Pretty ingenious solution actually.

And this should be kept in perspective in any case. A large battle in a war like that can easily have several hundreds of players on each side. The servers are tracking their actions and movements, as well as the movements of every weapon fire, the status of every module, all of it. Two fleets of a couple hundred Drakes in a battle, for example, can easily create THOUSANDS of simultanious server tracked objects -- and that would be one battle taking place among the forty thousand or so people on line, all of their actions and what not handled through the servers.

Yeah, it's not like something like that caused the first titan kill or anything.

Amazingly, five or six years ago the software and hardware struggled with the insane demands MMOs placed on them. But that was then. More, unlike this website debacle, they didn't have five years and a hundred million to write the code.

It's not actually a single server. It's multiple servers running in a cluster. They move systems around on the servers based on load. One physical server will handle a few low-population systems. Jita and systems in a 0.0 war are put on their own servers. The game just doesn't tell you when jumping through a gate is connecting to a new physical server.

Of course. Below is an article about their server setup in 2010. I imagine it's been upgraded since. Still pretty cool.

http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2010/06/16/closer-look-eve-onlines-new-server-cluster/

Which has so many separate servers and massive amounts of instancing, thus damaging the argument you were trying to make in the previous paragraphs.

I don't think so at all. Obviously there is no need for the Healthcare.gov setup to run on a single server. The point I was making is that private companies, including comparatively small ones, are already handling loads that dwarf anything the government website would ever be tasked with. The government is boasting that they are processing 17K users per HOUR. Given their ten-million subscriber base, it is reasonable to believe that the WOW server system can very likely manage well over a million users simultaniously at peak times.

[jeff47]

30. Verb

Unlike other MMOs there is only ONE instance, rather than numerous copies and more created as needed. If you and I both go to Jita, we will both ALWAYS be in the same location.

And if you and I both walk into Orgrimar, we'll both be in the same location. Does that mean WoW doesn't have instances?

Separating the systems accomplishes the same underlying effect as instancing - it puts the users into separate environments which can be put onto separate physical hardware.

Which does nothing to address my point. In an MMO the clients and servers are essentially continuously streaming information to each other

Actually, it does address your point. EvE is not constantly sending information between the servers and the clients. If you click "stop", the game client does not instantly transmit "stop" to the server. It queues up the "stop". Periodically, the client and server exchange information, and the command is sent to the server at that time.

In a normal situation, that happens frequently enough that it appears the communications are instantaneous. In a large war, the server bogs down so much that you can tell when that communications happens.

Not anymore. The new code handles this stuff very well. Pretty ingenious solution actually.

Yes, it's called "lower numbers of simultaneous players".

They have made improvements. But the wars also shrunk.

More, unlike this website debacle, they didn't have five years and a hundred million to write the code.

Yes, they had much longer, and had a much, much smaller problem to solve. For example, they didn't have to integrate with anyone. Healthcare.gov integrates with pretty much damn near everyone.

Of course. Below is an article about their server setup in 2010.

Which is why you spent your previous post harping over and over again on "ONE SERVER!!!!!".

I don't think so at all. Obviously there is no need for the Healthcare.gov setup to run on a single server. The point I was making is that private companies, including comparatively small ones, are already handling loads that dwarf anything the government website would ever be tasked with.

And the problem is you don't actually understand the size of the task. EvE and WoW are easy. Sure, they're big. Now. They were train wrecks when they launched. They've had 9 and 10 years to work out their problems, but you're pretending that they just released. But more importantly, they're just talking to themselves.

Now Healthcare.gov? They're communicating with dozens of external parties, which do not want the law to succeed. They have an "install base" that is several times larger than WoW's.

You are comparing making an omelette in your own kitchen to making 1000 omelettes in someone else's kitchen, while people keep moving the eggs and pans, and while your detractors turn up or down the gas randomly.

[Demo_Chris]

32. I think we have gotten sidetracked a bit. Good post...

I will leave that as the last word.

[BlueStreak]

7. Nonsense. Yout watch can barely manage displaying one time

Having worked in the IT industry, most in the large-scale systems end of it, for over 40 years, I have heard these nonsensical statements thousands of times. When the IBM PC came out, IT illiterates raved that "this is more power than the biggest mainframe had just 5 years ago."

No, that mainframe ran apps that supported thousands of users. The PC supported exactly one user. Not exactly the same thing.

17,000 enrollments an hour is plenty to enroll 25 million people before the deadline -- which is 4 times more than the actual load. Considering that there will be a crush toward the end of March, the capacity will need to be a little higher than that, and it will be by then. But it simply is not a problem.

In particular, YOU can enroll on the website right now. Don't worry about the other 16,999. YOU can get what you need right this minute.

[frazzled]

2. Hey, we wasted almost 2 hours the other day on the UPS website

Honestly, we're not stupid ... but we had a heck of a time trying to set up and pay for a third-party pickup to be shipped to yet another third party. We had to enter all the (tedious) information like 3 times, then ended up having to have two phone calls and two online chats before we could complete the task.

It may be that, as newbies, we just didn't get how to navigate this site. But it was honestly confusing. I can only imagine that even if and when the ACA federal website is completely fixed, there will be people like us who just get lost and need help.

It's not like the websites out there in the nongovernmental world are all that good sometimes either.

[BlueStreak]

8. I just did a Google search that I had to retry 3 times. Woe is me.

[Voice for Peace]

12. And at pretty much every page there is the option to use the telephone and talk to a person

[Whisp]

3. Let them all exercise their popping blood vessels

It seems to be something that is desperately needed for some strange health or emotional reasons.

[BlueStreak]

9. I suggest they enroll BEFORE they have their aneurysm

Because the ACA covers that.

[matt819]

4. Healthcare.gov is working

I just finished my application for self, spouse, and child. It worked like a charm.

My only observation is that it is not clear what happens next and how long it takes. In other words, the application is done. Now what?

I agree with the comment that specific info on plans is lacking. But the reality is almost certainly that the plans are either better than or less expensive than - or both - than what I already have. Maybe I should be concerned more about the details, but with an expected savings of $8,000 per year in premium costs and lower out of pocket for co-pay and deductibles. I'll worry about the details later.

[Voice for Peace]

5. I'm still having problems with registering

but at some point it's going to work for me.

[BlueStreak]

10. Sorry to hear that. Some people found it necessary to clear cache and cookies

Have you done that yet?

[Voice for Peace]

11. no, but I probably need to do that. I've been lazy

because realistically I can't afford to buy ANY health insurance
but I want to see where this process will lead somebody like
me.

It looks like New Mexico is good to go with the ACA.
I feel overall very positive about Obama and these efforts.

[BlueStreak]

14. I am not sure what is going on with NM

I thought they had their own exchange, but now healthcare.gov seems to indicate that for 2014, you will need to use healthcare.gov. I surmise that NM started to build their own, but bailed out and is now scrambling to use the federal site. Do you have any more information about that?

[Voice for Peace]

16. Here's the message on healthcare.gov once you specify New Mexico:

My impression is that it's a cooperative effort.

If you live in New Mexico, BeWellNM
is the Health Insurance Marketplace to serve you.

The BeWellNM website can give you information on
local events and resources available in your state,
including application assistance.

For Open Enrollment this year, instead of the BeWellNM
website, you’ll use HealthCare.gov to apply for coverage,
compare plans, and enroll.

Qualifying small business owners can apply for coverage,
compare plans, and enroll using New Mexico’s Small
Business Health Options Program (SHOP) website.

[BlueStreak]

23. Yes, that is really peciluar

I searched for news about this and didn't see anything. it looks to me like NM was planning to launch their own website but then switched gears suddenly. But I don't see that confirmed in any news reports.

[Voice for Peace]

31. My guess is that it's a cooperative effort, that during the open enrollment year

the healthcare.gov will help get people enrolled in
the NM exchange. Or people can go directly to their
website, and enroll there.

[napkinz]

18. kick

[Sheepshank]

19. ahh that explain RW and ACA haters focus shifting to"dump ACA because # xxxxx" n/t

[Maeve]

20. My experience hasn't been so good

Some trouble with registering, finally got an account set up and went to enroll--but got a null screen. Called for help--they couldn't get the info, either. Awaiting a call-back in the next few days. HOWEVER....

Hubby fixes computers for a living. Some of the businesses he works with have specialty software, so he's on the phone to tech support a LOT. One company he says he wants to send flowers to because their crappy software has meant many hours of billable labor for him getting it to work. And that's in the business world, the private sector that is supposed to be so efficient. Perspective.

We have been doing with minimal insurance for several years since he lost his day job and I am TOTALLY willing to put up with some inconvenience to get quality insurance at a lower price (going by the Kaiser Family calculator, we'll be getting Silver tier for about 75% of what we've been shelling out for catastrophic only). Luckily, we've been healthy. I know how much illness can cost.

[BlueStreak]

22. Have you cleared your cache and cookies?

I had problems similar to what you described until I cleared those items.

They are making a lot of changes, and old versions of pages and cookies can really create havoc.

I am not denying that individuals are having trouble getting the system to work. But the system at large is working. One shortcoming is that their call center doesn't seem to have any technical help desk. The call center people are only trained to try to enter an enrollment over the phone, not to resolve connection problems. That is a problem.

[pandora nm]

29. This fix worked for me

I had the same experience you describe. Try this:

Open a "private" browsing window.
In Firefox: File - New private window - healthcare.gov.

I'm sure other browsers have a similar feature.
As soon as I accessed the site in the "new private window", everything worked perfectly!

[Maeve]

34. Appreciate the advice, but didn't work

Last edited Thu Nov 14, 2013, 08:59 PM - Edit history (1)

As I said, Hubby's a techie and we've tried many and various things (all the usual--he's been doing this for 25 years!) And the call center couldn't read the page, either...
I blame Ohio's governor for dumping on the federal government instead of setting up a state exchange.

[Peacetrain]

26. Well it has become "gospel"

and will take the second coming to get people off the stick.. I am just so bone tired of people thinking that nothing should be glitchy with a system this large..

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

27. I just tried to go on just to see how fast it would be. This is a "peak time," right around 6:00

when people are at home before dinner. I got on. Fast. No problem. I was able to navigate the website quickly. No problem. I live in Maryland which has established its own health care exchanges. I got connected. No problem.

I'm going to try again later on this evening, around 8:00 or 8:30; this should be another "peak time" when kids have been put to bed and parents are getting settled and relaxed.

Note: Maryland was yet another state that had been having problems getting people signed on. I tried the website. It was fine. I don't need insurance. I work for the federal government and already have it. I just wanted to see if the website worked and it does.

The Corporate Media got ya'll all riled up over nothing. Stop buying into their bullshit.

[aptal]

28. Have signed up and received my intial packet from the insurance company

Problem is I can't afford it so I guess same as always I will be without insurance.

[Dems to Win]

33. CA's website appeared to work for me -- but I didn't get the promised invoice

So, the back end didn't work, even though it appeared that everything went fine. I was supposed to get a bill directly from the insurer, but I didn't get it.

Now, after waiting 3 weeks for the promised bill from the insurer, I have to start over again.

No, the health care websites are NOT working.

It breaks my heart that neither my state or federal government can create a functional website about 5% as complex as Amazon.com. If government can't get this done, they can't solve any problems, at all. Very frustrating, to the point of despair.

[napkinz]

35. kick

nt