2021年7月7日 星期三

On Tech: Government tech moves too slooowly

An inherent flaw in government purchasing of technology: Budget cycles take forever, tech changes fast.

Government tech moves too slooowly

An inherent flaw in government purchasing of technology: Budget cycles take forever, tech changes fast.

Ruru Kuo

Let's talk about the exciting topic of government procurement! Woo hoo?!

Seriously, the way that government agencies buy technology is helpful context to understand the Pentagon's abrupt cancellation on Tuesday of a technology project that was billed as essential to modernize the U.S. military. When government tech goes wrong, one culprit is often a budgetary bureaucracy that is at odds with the pace of technological progress.

The Defense Department project, the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure, known by the acronym JEDI like from "Star Wars," was intended to buy commercially available cloud-computing software to put the U.S. military on tech's new(-ish) wave. Microsoft was awarded the $10 billion contract in 2019, but it had been held up since then by accusations by Amazon that former President Donald J. Trump improperly interfered in the contract process.

Years of mudslinging by tech companies that felt they were unfairly passed over probably spelled doom for JEDI. This contract fight was unusually messy, but it also highlighted a deeper problem that has rendered a lot of government technology creaky and crummy: By the time a government agency buys something, the technology might be past its prime or not fit its needs anymore.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Defense Department started drawing up plans for JEDI in 2017, and now it's basically starting over by asking companies to submit new contract proposals.

Reading the news, I had a flashback to a conversation that I had last year with Robin Carnahan, who was recently confirmed as the administrator of the U.S. General Services Administration. "Stop thinking of digital infrastructure the way you would fund a bridge," said Carnahan, who at the time was working with U.S. Digital Response, an organization that helps local governments modernize their technology.

What she meant is that local, state and federal governments typically pay for roadways or other big-ticket projects once after a long deliberation and then try not to think about it too much for the next few decades.

But this poses an inherent flaw in government purchasing when it comes to technology. Long government budget cycles and mind-sets are a mismatch to the pace of technology and its need for constant improvements and upkeep.

ADVERTISEMENT

Carnahan gave me the example of a state buying software for its unemployment insurance program. To qualify, a company proposing the new software has to put together a proposal for the state's department of labor, and then legislators must approve the money. That process might take two or three years.

That means by the time a company gets the green light to build a website to handle unemployment claims, the proposed technology is already several years old. Tack on even more time to get the website up and running to a state's specifications. It's not a great outcome. You wouldn't be thrilled if you bought a new smartphone and it came with 2016 features and functions.

Byzantine bureaucracies and long lead times hold back technology outside of government, too. The lengthy development processes for cars is one reason in-vehicle entertainment and display systems are sometimes annoyingly clunky. By the time they make it into your pickup, the technology might have been designed years ago.

The sad thing about government technology is that it wasn't always so sad. The United States government, especially the military and intelligence agencies, used to have the best technology in the world. The military helped steer the direction of innovations including computer chips, powerful databases and the internet.

ADVERTISEMENT

Governments still spend a fortune on technology, but the first and best customers for new products are usually people rather than the public sector. One reason is that we don't take years to make up our minds about new tech.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Subscribe Today

We hope you've enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible through subscriber support. Subscribe to The New York Times with this special offer.

Before we go …

  • This might be the biggest ransomware attack ever: Security experts say that up to 1,500 businesses could be affected by Russian cybercriminals who compromised software used by thousands of organizations and demanded a ransom to fix it, my colleague Kellen Browning writes. Around the same time as that attack, hackers believed to be a Russian intelligence agency are accused of breaching a contractor for the Republican National Committee, Nicole Perlroth and David E. Sanger report.
  • "The good, the meh and the ugly": Brian X. Chen writes that Microsoft's first major update to Windows in six years has improvements including a more smartphone-like interface but that parts of Windows 11 also "feel frustratingly familiar."
  • Pretending to be someone you're not online is nothing new, but … A writer for Vox says that new technologies and shifting norms have led more people to pretend to be teen girls and Black and Asian women on apps like TikTok and Instagram. It's "easier than ever to assume an almost entirely new identity online, without regard for the consequences such behavior can cause," Vox writes.

Hugs to this

During a recent heat wave in British Columbia, a mama bear and her cubs took a dip in a backyard pool.

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you'd like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here. You can also read past On Tech columns.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/

There’s No Right Way to Dress Your Baby

Eventually my son will develop his own style, but what should he wear until then?

There's No Right Way to Dress Your Baby

By Matthew Schnipper

Matthew Schnipper's son, Renzo, has been on a style journey.courtesy of Matthew Schnipper

Before my son, Renzo, was born in early 2020, my then-co-worker Emily came to my office with a gift bag. At that point I'd received many generous gifts for the baby, but none of them moved me like this one. I opened the bag and pulled out a onesie featuring the cover art for the Japanese noise musician Merzbow's classic 1996 album, "Pulse Demon." I nearly cried. As a music obsessive, I felt understood.

It soon occurred to me, though, that I might have been shoving some of my own desire to be perceived as cool via my obscure taste onto my child. Some years ago, The Onion published an article with the headline "Cool Dad Raising Daughter On Media That Will Put Her Entirely Out Of Touch With Her Generation." In the accompanying photo, he's smiling as she reluctantly holds a Talking Heads LP. Rereading the satirical piece with the "Pulse Demon" onesie in mind struck a little too close to home.

As a short, bald man relatively uncomfortable in my body until recent years, I have leaned into the adage that clothes make the man. That also means its inverse, that if your clothes aren't too distinct, they won't speak for you. For the past decade or so it's meant wearing plain stuff, loose fits and washed-out colors — a blank canvas that my personality can fill in (minus my slight obsession with sludge metal-band tees).

Ideally, I'll allow my son to have the same freedom to decide who he is and how he would like to present himself to the world. But as a baby, he has both no agency to do that, and just the most nascent of personalities for me to go off. So while it seems like a fun idea to have him show off a future love for avant-garde bands, maybe that isn't the most practical style dictum. But what is?

ADVERTISEMENT

As a rule, kids' clothing is ephemeral. It gets spilled on, puked on, pooped on, and only fits for a few months. Needing to change our son so frequently in the beginning of his life, my wife and I were fairly indiscriminate with his clothing choices, grabbing whatever we'd bought, gotten as a hand-me-down or been gifted. That included everything from footie pajamas with alligators, sailor striped pants and various items hand tie-dyed in Vermont by my sister.

Like any first-time parent with a smartphone and social media, we took a lot of photos. He looked like an angel in all of them, of course, but the photos we returned to most were the ones where he was the focus, not his outfit. He was dashing in a mustard-colored pointelle one-piece, or in cornflower-blue pants and a white T-shirt. Over time, though, we began to gravitate toward only buying him clothes with minimal embellishment, then eventually none at all. Now, the biggest pizazz in his wardrobe is stripes.

I know that's kind of boring. I admire (and follow on Instagram) parents who have fully embraced the slapdash way kids live and synthesize that into their wardrobe with bright colors and a Jackson Pollock-esque approach to pattern. Take for instance Leo, son of Sunny Shokrae, a photographer and the author of a recent children's book on Farsi. Leo always looks fantastic, wearing black and yellow pants that are checked on one leg and striped on the other, full-on leopard print or a denim jacket with a big '70s collar.

Leo is not blending in. And he pulls that off because Sunny does, too. She loves color, patterns and stripes; think M.C. Escher gone Day-Glo. "I buy clothes for Leo the way I would buy clothes for myself, and that's the only way I think I can," she said. "If I were to buy clothes any other way he'd look like a clown, because I wouldn't know what I'm doing."

ADVERTISEMENT

Perhaps I don't have enough confidence in my own taste for Renzo to splash out the way Leo and Sunny do, but I'm scared of setting him up for something he doesn't want to be. Still, looking at their photos, you don't get the feeling that Leo is upset at his mom's sense of adventure.

In a way, by eschewing that whimsy in dressing Renzo, what we've done is inadvertently baby-ized the uniform approach to dressing that lots of busy, famous and important people like Steve Jobs and Barack Obama have popularized. Mr. Obama typically wore only blue or gray suits during his presidency. "I don't want to make decisions about what I'm eating or wearing. Because I have too many other decisions to make," he told Vanity Fair in 2012. That tracks to parenthood, where time is deeply precious and a minute feeling self-conscious about the Merzbow onesie is wasted.

But despite all the consistency in Mr. Obama's suit colors, the one he's most remembered for was tan — the single day he decided to step out of his routine. Translated into babydom, does that mean we're setting Renzo up for wallflower life, destined to be gawked at the moment he tries out some flair? It turns out my wife is already planning for this.

"He can dress a little bit ridiculous," she said to me. "Ten percent ridiculous is fine." And so in addition to the muted tones that populate his wardrobe, she's begun to introduce more clothes with animals on them, more bright colors. He's pretty quickly taken to a neon-green sun hat. And he loves his Nikes with a red swoosh, asking me to put them on his feet most mornings as soon as he wakes up. If, in the next year or so, when he can more ably dress himself, he chooses to wear only fluorescents, more power to him.

ADVERTISEMENT

All of this seems nuts to worry about. He's a baby. He could wear a toga cut out of a paper bag and our main concerns as parents should still be: Is he happy, healthy and safe? We're lucky enough that the answer to all of those seems to be a consistent yes. So why not think about his appearance? I want to set him up to feel confident when he's standing in front of the mirror. Anything else is a bad look.

Matthew Schnipper is the director of entertainment at Vice.

Want More on Kids and Clothing?

  • Jessica Grose, our parenting columnist, explained last year why kids fight getting dressed. The answer has something to do with toddlers "exploring the limits of their personal control" and driving their parents bonkers.
  • Sara Clemence wondered why boys' clothes are largely designed to be practical, while girls' are designed to be pretty.
  • In the before times, Marcy Swingle photographed 48 of the coolest kids in New York City, and asked about their style inspirations.
  • In January, Reyhan Harmanci looked at our weird pandemic clothing choices. Finally, if after more than a year indoors you don't know how to dress yourself, much less your child, Jessica Testa encourages you to schedule an appointment with those clothes you haven't worn in a year.

Subscribe Today

We hope you've enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible through subscriber support. Subscribe to The New York Times with this special offer.

Tiny Victories

Parenting can be a grind. Let's celebrate the tiny victories.

I bought window stickers from the Target dollar section before a flight with my toddler. He spent the entire three hours peeling them off and sticking them on the window and pull-out table. My other two kiddos were plugged into their devices, and it was probably the most relaxing flight I ever had as a mom. — Yousfa Janjua, Irvine, Calif.

If you want a chance to get your Tiny Victory published, find us on Instagram @NYTparenting and use the hashtag #tinyvictories; email us; or enter your Tiny Victory at the bottom of this page. Include your full name and location. Tiny Victories may be edited for clarity and style. Your name, location and comments may be published, but your contact information will not. By submitting to us, you agree that you have read, understand and accept the Reader Submission Terms in relation to all of the content and other information you send to us.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for Parenting from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/