Requiring entropy in the username? What? I can understand the password, but what site requires you to put a symbol in your username?
> lowercase or capital letter, a number, or one of these symbols _.@/-."
says "or" and not "and", so it doesn't actually seem like there's any issue so long as you include a letter. Then the only real restriction is the minimum of six characters.
In other words, the sign up page text, the sign up page JS validation, the back end database, and the trouble logging in page ALL have different requirements just for the username.
Medicare was successfully delivering care decades before the web was even invented and we all somehow survived.
On most health insurance sites, the first page is splashy and nice and then the sign-up process looks like it was transported to the present directly from 2003.
Again, BCBS et. al. have been inflicting terrible web experiences on their users for quite some time now.
Why are we still surprised when a website gets crippled by a big launch? This happens again and again and again, and people are surprised every time!
All this negativity is bad for your limbic system. Having your primary emotion driven via rage/anger or even fear is not a health way to live life. Cortosol and all of that, yknow?
Now, here in CA, the coveredca.com is actually really good. It does a good job, and it will substantially reduce my healthcare costs A LOT! By 50% in fact, and I'm not eligible for any credits/subsidies.
The ACA is hands down GREAT news for entrepreneurs. It makes covering yourself and your family possible and affordable. And when you go to hire those employees it is reducing costs there. You can get a platinum PPO plan in SF for $492 a month. Typically that plan would cost $1500 at trinet (employer cost).
I can also predict the minimization/irrelevancing of trinet too. It's primary purpose was to pool small business for healthcare in a handy package, but now that isn't as necessary.
1. They are comparing themselves to a successful commercial product (the iPhone / iPad) which was orders of magnitude more polished and performant when it was released. This is complete rubbish and is going to raise the hackles of people who have worked on and delivered decent product.
2. There are pull requests on their repo three months old that have not been merged. People are fixing problems for them, but these fixes are not being merged -- not even the simple typo fix ones.
3. This site is supposed to be a guide for acquiring something you are legally required to have (or you face a financial penalty). The bar for usability for such a site should be way higher than "redirect to a a phone line every time we get a lot of traffic".
Not saying it's great, but when compared to tax returns and particularly other health insurance sites, its usability is downright fantastic.
I see it as any big new service out there. In the beginning there is going to be a spike in user interest. I'm guessing a large number of people using the site right now are doing it just out of interest (due to news reports about it). People browsing the site may have no intentions of actually paying for healthcare through the system, they just want to poke around and see what it has to offer.
That's what I was thinking. If experienced development organizations like Blizzard and EA and Rockstar can't pull off a glitch-free first day launch, I'm going to cut these government agencies some slack.
The sign up screen lists some requirements for the username, but not all of them. My sign up attempt failed several times with a non-descript error message, which I attributed to the heavy traffic, until later I saw the "Forgot your username" page listed more requirements (apparently you can't end a username in a special character, which wasn't mentioned on the signup page, and which I only added at the end because that page wouldn't let me through without one)
So finally I signed up, but I get invalid login message every time I try to log in. Thinking maybe I mistyped my password (twice?) I clicked "forgot your password" and entered my username. It actually sent me a Forgot Password link to my email (confirming that I'm in the system) but when I click the link in the email it pulls up a page that says "We could find any account with the information you provided" - yes, with the information I provided from their own link. Have done that three times.
With these kinds of basic inconsistencies and bugs, I'm actually hesitant to enter my info once I do get in, wondering what kind of massive security holes are waiting to be discovered...
Frequently when I see that sort of thing it's because they're escaping/stripping characters out - often using myemail+tag@gmail.com will result in myemailtag@gmail.com or myemail%2btag@gmail.com and the resulting lookup will fail if it isn't de-escaped correctly.
Sure enough last night I was able to get in with the credentials I signed up with.
I won't be signing up for any plans through it though, similar coverage would cost me about the same as what I pay now. Then again, my employer picks up 50% of my premium, so for some people it may represent a huge savings.
* The IRS to verify your AGI, family size and marital status
* The SSA to verify your social security number, SS benefit status and incarceration status
* The DHS SAVE system to verify your citizenship and immigration status
* The DOD, VA, Office of Personnel and Peace Corps to check if you're already enrolled in health programs through their services
Just to name a few, and all of which can be external bottlenecks the team behind Healthcare.gov can't control. You're seriously underestimating the complexity of this website. They've hidden it well!
I know a lot of good work went into it by well meaning individuals, but as it stands it was all for naught as it doesn't work
That being said, I think the comparisons to Apple are off. They should take it on the chin. We messed up, and we'll fix it. End of story. Not "yeah but.. apple".
In the meantime, we (software developers) can help. Data is widely available. I made one info graphic:
http://vida.io/discussion/SuRAGDs7J78HCvoxE
Anyone is interested in building more tools?
I thought it was the Senate Democrats voting against the house spending bill that shut the government down?
