FBI Delays Computer-System Contract 112
Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "The FBI postponed until 2006 the awarding of a huge computer-overhaul contract, gun-shy after a $170 million failed first effort, the Wall Street Journal reports: 'Much is riding on the project's success. Congress and other overseers pilloried the FBI for its reliance on paper records, forms and file cabinets. The FBI only last year completed the rollout of the Internet to its agents and analysts. And even though the bureau installed a computerized case-management system in the mid-1990s, it relied largely on aging, less-agile technology to do so. And it did little to eliminate the department's notorious number of paper forms -- currently numbering more than 1,000.'"
remember (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:remember (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The cheapest solution is readily available! (Score:5, Insightful)
They are the numero-uno agency in charge kidnapping cases, and are very very good at it.
Besides, without them criminals could play hopscotch and avoid effecting law enforcement by skipping across state lines.
Just what we need... a uber database for FBI (Score:4, Insightful)
We don't need to have every database cross checked. All we need is one FBI database for the dangerous criminals, the murderers and corporate criminals. Before long, states will check other states databases for minor criminal offenses. I'll give one example- try getting a job as a realtor. Arkansas will check their database to see if anyone is behind on payments for state guarenteed loans (like school loans). If you are, Arkansas will not give you a license. Oklahoma has the same law. What will happen the way the system is now, is the guy from Arkansas will move to Oklahoma and get a job there. By having every state cross check every other state, people will not be allowed to start over. Maybe Joe Sixpack went to State U, ran himself into $40,000 in debt, and feels he can never overcome such a large amount of debt.
Or what about minor crimes? What if someone at the age of 20 decided to join the Alabama KKK? That person never broke a crime, just went to protests and meetings. At age 24 the person quits, and two years later moves to New York. Should New York know about his prior membership because of some anti-terrorism database? I know what everyone is thinking, the KKK is bad, so screw that person. I'll give a counter example, same facts as above, but instead of KKK the person is a member of PETA where his cohorts raid a university research center and free test animals.
Are we still a free nation, or a nation where everyone has a history stored in a database?
What is going to happen is some start-up in Cali will offer a service, checking a person through every state and FBI database. Once that becomes profitable, forget about ever trying to get a job for more than minimum wage if you have a blemish on your record. It will be the same thing employers are doing with checking credit reports before hiring workers.
We need less databases, and more privacy laws.
My favorite (Score:3, Insightful)
"Stranger, obey our laws. We have both swords and shovels and doubt anyone would miss you."
Frankly, I think that's how we ought to handle crimnals that move about. I do see a need for Federal agents for things like Immigration. Instead of disbanding the FBI completely, let's just transfer the funding and field agents to "La Migra" & the Customs Service. That ought to give us a nice handle in controlling illegal immigration, looking for terrorists trying to sneak into the country, people trying to smuggle goods, etc. which is basically what the FBI was supposed to be doing in the first place.
2 cents,
Queen B
Replacing paper is not the solution (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, if your system is simply too complex to manage then you may have a problem right there. Throwing computer power at it to better keep track is no alternative to thinking up a better system, it is just a good tool for making it more efficient.
Of course using a more efficient system opens up new possibilities, thats not the point, but no number of computers is going to reduce 1000 forms to a more managable number by itself.
Re:The cheapest solution is readily available! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The cheapest solution is readily available! (Score:2, Insightful)
Congress sets treaties here, not laws to be enforced by the military.
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;"
The militia run by each independent state. The laws of the union: counterfeit, treason, and piracy. Also for defending against offense ON OUR SOIL. This clause reminds me how unconstitutional our military is, on top of the FBI.
Department of Justice
The DoJ isn't constitutional! The founding of the DoJ (1870ish) happened in order to create a more powerful central authority. It was created after Lincoln won his illegal War between States in order to create a strong federal government. Lincoln campaigned for a stronger central government and the South threatened to secede if he won (they knew he would tax them in order to build his empire). Lincoln hated blacks and had no opinion on slavery.
The Constitution specifically addresses interstate issues by placing them under the jurisdiction of the Federal government. You can't just assign them to individual states or municipalities
Regulating the states means making sure no state attempts to prevent trade between themselves and another. It doesn't mean taking over what two states could normally accomplish together (and often do).
Try running a kidnapping or mail fraud investigation across several states, where each state has to provide resources for the investigation pertaining to their particular state. So instead of one group freely travelling across state lines investigating the issue, you're trying to coordinate multiple groups all with limited knowledge of the evidence
One unconstitutional group freely travels to handle kidnapping, all the while creating havoc and performing oppresive actions against its citizens.
Kidnapping should be handled by private investigators paid for by insurance companies, not federal thug who rarely solve the crimes anyway. I'm shocked that citizens today really feel safer with the FBI breathing down our necks.
Security vs. Complexity (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a big complicated system" because of the variety of issues the FBI investigates...
High complexity and the need for utmost security is the ideal combination for monumental failure, IMO. The problem with security is not the lack of adequate secure technology. Current techniques do work, otherwise our electronic commerce would have collapsed already. The problem is that hackers and ennemy spies will try to find ways of getting around the security barriers by exploiting defects in the underlying software. Since the number of defects in a software system is proportional to its complexity, there is no doubt that the system's security will be compromised at one time or another. It makes no difference who develops it.
A network's security is thus intimately tied to the reliability and robustness of the network's software. Security companies have no way of guaranteeing that the various software modules used in their systems are defect-free. This uncertainty is the Achilles' heel of the security industry. The solution is to move away from algorithmic software and adopt a non-algorithmic, signal-based, synchronous software model.
Re:huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
According the article, the FBI let its system stagnate and then tried to catch up all at once. The problem with this approach is that the legacy system continues to stagnate while the new one is under development. If there were any deficiencies in the new system or the new system fails altogether, the FBI is still stuck with the old system.
One lesson is, don't let your system stagnate. It must be in a state of continual and regular upgrade. The side effect of this approach might be the main benefit: you will have up-to-date internal knowledge of how your system works. You don't have to hire outside consultants that have to learn how your system works before they can begin to improve it.
Who ya gonna call? (Score:2, Insightful)
"FBI switchboard operator."
"Yes, hello, I need to talk to someone in counterterrorism...?"
"One moment, I'll connect you." *BEEP BOOP BOOP*
"Counterterrorism task force, this is agent Smith, how may I help you?"
"Yeah, this is Mark Chambers with the INS. I'm calling about this guy, Mohammed Atta. He's applied for a visa for flight school, but he keeps raving about jihad and the Great Satan. You know anything about this guy?"
"Maybe. I'll have to look through some files. If you leave your address, I can put together a packet and FedEx it to you. Shouldn't take more than a week."
"A week!"
"Yeah, well, I've got to file the pink half of an A-21 form with the Records office to get access to his file. Then Cheryl will have to check if we've got a file on this guy, plus cross-check any aliases he might have, but Cheryl's out sick today. She should be back Tuesday. Anyway, once Cheryl finds his file, I've got to review it for anything important. Sometimes the guys get sloppy and they leave classified stuff in these files, and I can't very well ship that to some INS guy I don't even know, can I?" *chuckles* "But that's just his main file; those aren't updated with the recent stuff. So after that I have to go to Intelligence Gathering and give them the canary copy of the A-21 with them, and they'll look for anything recent we've picked up about your guy on the wires. And then, I have to Xerox his file, right, and then I send the copy to you. Sorry I can't FAX it; machine's broke. Anyway, I get like fifteen of these a day, and I've got a backlog right now. Cheryl's been sick since last Thursday, see. So give me a good week."
"...okay...um, nevermind...look, I'm sure this Atta guy's okay, just fooling around. Don't bother."
Re:Replacing paper is not the solution (Score:3, Insightful)
This is called Process Design.
Often in companies and big organisations, the Process Managers or
Process Designers are people not working in these processes once they
are in place. They just sit there, dreaming up nice theories about how things
could be more efficient or measurable - KPIs, "You can't manage what you can't
measure" and other bullshit is what you hear from them.
After that, a software is build to fit their strange requirements. Sooner or
later, this software meets reality, i.e. real users which will have to
live the processes and maybe introduced their own shortcuts and simplifications,
which now won't work anymore, because the new software doesn't allow them.
Big discussions arise, the Process Managers fingerpoint to IT because
the system is not doing what the Users expected (it's doing what the
Process Managers specified though, but that doesn't help).
If the deviation is too big, the system get's thrown away.