←back to thread

306 points jameshh | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.232s | source
Show context
EngineeringStuf ◴[] No.44410698[source]
I've worked on a variety of large UK government systems for the past ten years.

This blog encapsulates the problem of writing government services/software, which often results in strange outcomes.

Writing software for government is essentially the codification of centuries worth of Acts of Parliament.

Now imagine building the HMPO passport system, and then some underlying Law/Act is changed or repealed etc.

Now someone has to find and change everything that the Law/Act affected in all systems.

Now consider that the government frequently outsources this work to expensive consultancies who are motivated to elongate contracts and extract maximum value from the client... And ideally become entrenched.

All whilst building systems of varying quality and inflexibility so that the next time that a Law/Act is changed then this whole process repeats.

There is no central decision making authority to wrangle this problem (there used to be Spend Controls), which is why Government services delivery is so expensive.

replies(5): >>44411480 #>>44411742 #>>44413409 #>>44413834 #>>44430103 #
1. dietr1ch ◴[] No.44430103[source]
This problem of law being essentially an append only repository of amendments is not unique to the UK.

I'd be cool to have a system that just needs to be fed "patches" in an append only way instead of having to scatter exceptions (if branches) all around.

Some logic programming languages can do that a little bit, but I think that the real problem is that there's no tech debt budget, and lawyers working around the laws can also profit from things being complicated. It'd be cool to have people devoted to simply laws to keep things as simple as possible.