To keep it from spiraling into a ridiculously long answer, what would be the most appropriate response?
I'm not a C or C++ career programmer, but wouldn't the appropriate response be that C++ is object oriented, that if not writing with C++ classes then you're using the C subset of C++?
Most of the good coders I know would walk right on out the door if the first thing you asked them to do was write something for free.
While I generally subscribe to that philosophy, if the company has a standard requirement to write a program as part of the interview, I write it.
And I've found that as a result of that requirement, when I get hired after the test I'm working with only good coders. Has happened twice in my career, including current job.
There is no indication of this. His collection of properties and luxeries were quite modest for a renowned legendary career trader on Wall Street who co-founded NASDAQ.
As for the programmers, they lived in average midde class homes. They asked for a bonus of $60,000 but were fed up with what they were being asked to do, which was to rig up some information for auditors. I've looked at this in some detail (they were AS/400 programmers, and so am I), and it's unclear to me how misled they were.
As far as that goes, all the employees on the 17th floor were told the trades they thought they were doing settled in Europe (London Exchange?).
Clearly there were various activities at times of rigging up fake trades and entering them for reporting, but they all seemed to believe that Madoff was doing something with the account funds and just needed something to report. Fraudulent? Yes. Conspiracy with Madoff? No.
I've blogged what I could determine of it all as the story unwound last year.
I can assure you, we've had to deal with multiple cases where just a minor version step of an IBM mainframe compiler resulted in failing code, requiring a rewrite using alternate methods.
If you think it's that simple, you've never had to use it...
I've been on some of the largest IBM AS/400's running multi-billion dollar companies for twenty years, but not mainframes. However the largest AS/400 ranks with largest mainframes.
There's something like 10 different levels of issues with running old programs on a newer mainframe.
The old OS may not run on a newer mainframe. Perhaps because of devices that weren't available a half century ago, or what-not.
Binaries of everything written in last 40 years still runs on current AS/400 iseries, up to newest OS 6.1, where a recompile would be necessary for older programs. I've seen lots in technical press that implies twenty year old mainframe binaries running on newer mainframes, for example IBM CASE system. Perhaps the new mainframes purchased couldn't run the old software after all, if you know that as a fact.
Even if IBM was so nice as to add that support to a slightly newer version of the same (old) OS, it doesn't guarantee that it won't have been changed enough that your old, very low-level programs just don't quite run right.
Not slightly newer, it would have to be currently supported OS versions.
And even if they do, we're talking about the days when the simplest changes to an application typically require recompiling a binary.
Are you a mainframe veteran? OS/400 software has never needed a recompile, even when the AS/400 went from 48 bit CISC to 64 bit RISC in mid nineties.
The compiler originally used may be available for the newer system, but have a few subtle differences that make it not quite work.
You don't sound like an IBM mainframe veteran.
A just-slightly-newer compiler may be the only thing available, and it will have changed significantly enough to ensure several of your old programs won't compile.
My understanding of things like the IBM CASE system is that the compilers for some of the language used for the code is no longer available, but if available, IBM compilers of different levels are not rewritten and slightly different.
And don't dare mention IBM support. They're HEAVILY geared towards newer equipment. They don't have top-experts in each and every version of each and every bit of obsolete software just lying around, waiting for you to call.
No truer words ever spoken.
Now, maybe if the government threw enough money at IBM, they might perform better, but I have a hard time seeing it even then. We certainly pay them several times more than the combined salaries of the handful of mainframe experts in the company, all for the one problem that crops up every 5 years, and all the support we ever get is: "Try a newer version. No good? Well feature X was depreciated when this program was written 40 years ago, and is now unsupported."
The government has thrown boatloads of money at IBM in desperate attempts to keep ancient systems working. Even with that, IBM more than once has responded that they don't have anyone anymore that knows anything about it. Whether that's playing hardball or not, it's probably true. They could get the expertise from retirees if needed though, so more in the realm of F-U hardball in my opinion.
Billions of dollars sunk into failed projects, and yet the government bureaucrats keep hiring these consulting companies for software work. Therefore they share a large part of the blame: at the least it shows incompetence and negligence, at worse it implies collusion and fraud.
Yes, although I know that both parties really would like a successful project. But there is no penalty for failure, and they keep sinking billions into failed software projects with the same giant consultig companies, so it is nothing short of collusion and fraud.
You always expect the AS400 to be a bit more impressive the way the AS400 guys would talk about it. Then one day I walked into the room where it was kept and had to stifle a laugh.
true, the electronics have become much smaller through the years. Even the ones that run multi-billion dollar companies that I work on are not behemoths.
I have a 270 that can handle quite a load in my apartment. Also new large Linux and Windows servers and my AS/400 270 is only about three times the size of a PC server. I have a larger AS/400 825 stored in the garage as it requires two 220 volt hookups and I don't have that extra capacity in my apartment.
These jackoffs would have us believe it's going to cost $180 million to replace some bullshit law enforcement database software that's 20 years old?
The rated you funny, but it's true. FBI CASE system also vintage 1980's mainframe system. They have tried and failed twice to rewrite 20 year old law enforcement database software at over half a billion spent so far. First time they said they didn't even have anything salvageable to show for it and threw out the entire project which aos happened to be around that magic number of $180 million. (These are mind boggling numbers. The beltway bandits and their bureaucrat sponsors are capable of sinking unfathomable amounts of money into failed software projects.)
As has been noted in previous posts, newer IBM hardware runs the older software, so it shouldn't be ancient hardware falling apart as is implied here. I haven't read TFA to see if there's any detail behind what exactly is failing 1/3 of the time because generally there's no detail and what there is I mostly don't believe.
People blame the government bureaucrats, but the failed work is done by the huge consulting companies. They can blame the specs but the failures are for nearly every major software system for the last 20 years, several multiple time failures, and several still not replaced or working.
This sounds to me like the bureaucrats are raising the level of lying in a competition for what's the most desperate government software system needing replaced.
I might be wrong, because it's a complex system, but the government each year is spending around 20% of the GDP (although really it doesn't collect anywhere near that amount in taxes). So I'm going to say that the 12% tax rate is not going to be enough.
The 12% or so equivalent figure came from a Flat Tax organization. I don't have the details of the calculation but they've obviously put a lot of thought into it. I don't believe the GDP spending comparison is valid because of the deficit spending as you mention.
My preference is a single graded income tax scale with no exemptions, no hidden payroll taxes, no sneaky deductions (those mostly favor the rich). We can set it up so poor people pay a lower percentage, and rich people pay a higher percentage.
I suggest everyone who has income gets a 40 x minimum wage deductible from income. Tax over that is flat rate. I saw a 12+ percent rate the other day as the flat rate equivalent to current taxation. With minimum wage deduction I expect it would be 14 percent or so for everyone.
One of the main hurdles would be loss of mortgage and child exemptions, that sort of thing, but if it was clear there were no exemptions for anyone and none that Congress could pass without invalidating the system and requiring Congress to be lined up in front of a firing squad, then I believe most people would agree with this and support it enthusiastically.
But it will take a strong bit of persuasion to take Congress' ability to extort kickbacks with tax loopholes and bribe voters with tax cut gimmicks away. Like voting in new members who endorse this as part of a reset of the ongoing mess.
I don't know why on earth you would say "job security was lower" because contractors at least always had a defined term of work and only in the most extreme circumstances would you be able to get rid of them even if you as an employee thought they sucked. Meanwhile at any moment Hammer Of Rightsizing could come down on you as an employee.
In all the cases I've seen through the years, consultants were first to go in budget cutbacks, not employee layoffs and keep the contractors.
I find it hard that someone works at a workplace for 10 years, and then quits when they replace the sofa.
He may not have even had a sofa, before or after. It was code phrase at EA that you're not spending enough hours at work, in other words, a veiled warning. He had a choice of spending more time at work or spend it looking for another job. He chose the latter.
Am I the only person who refuses to believe something purely on the grounds that it makes me angry? These aren't unreasonable questions.
Probably. And you got insightful for not knowing anything about it as well. So maybe you're not the only one.
The attacks came from IP addresses used by the Chinese government. Yes, sophisticated crackers could hijack the IP addresses and pretend they are the Chinese government by breaking into Chinese political activist gmail accounts just to make you right, but I doubt it.
well I will add to the compost heap today. When I read the headline, I thought that it may be a more fundamental learning of use and relationship of words and what they describe than what TFA describes. Colleges are in a university is a "trusted relationship"? How very ignorant and disappointing, as every AI project I've ever read about is.
What would be impressive is to form associations as in a list of universities including Carnegie-Melon, or a statement that Carnegie-Melon is a university, then in other text that Carnegie-Melon consists of seven colleges to draw an association of university made up of colleges. A human review of such associations could then add a "trusted" attribute, or multiple statements associating university "made up" or "consists of" or other similar phrases with colleges, students, faculty, and a host of other associations would numerically become probable with multiple instances encountered for a self scoring "probable relationship".
But hand holding "trusted relationships" for the researchers personal domain is pathetic.
If you're stupid enough to refuse upgrading a major component of your system just because you don't think you're using it, well, then you deserve what you get.
You weren't addressing to me directly, but *I* wasn't using it, I just found out from the poster's informative post that Adobe Acrobat Reader was using it.
Rather than upgrade something I can't get rid of, I will be uninstalling Acrobat Reader and anything else that uses it.
So le's rephrase that to anything stupid enough to not use my default browser without my permission deserves to be uninstalled.
Slashdot Mirror
To keep it from spiraling into a ridiculously long answer, what would be the most appropriate response?
I'm not a C or C++ career programmer, but wouldn't the appropriate response be that C++ is object oriented, that if not writing with C++ classes then you're using the C subset of C++?
Most of the good coders I know would walk right on out the door if the first thing you asked them to do was write something for free.
While I generally subscribe to that philosophy, if the company has a standard requirement to write a program as part of the interview, I write it.
And I've found that as a result of that requirement, when I get hired after the test I'm working with only good coders. Has happened twice in my career, including current job.
rd
Madoff made billions from this.
There is no indication of this. His collection of properties and luxeries were quite modest for a renowned legendary career trader on Wall Street who co-founded NASDAQ.
As for the programmers, they lived in average midde class homes. They asked for a bonus of $60,000 but were fed up with what they were being asked to do, which was to rig up some information for auditors. I've looked at this in some detail (they were AS/400 programmers, and so am I), and it's unclear to me how misled they were.
As far as that goes, all the employees on the 17th floor were told the trades they thought they were doing settled in Europe (London Exchange?).
Clearly there were various activities at times of rigging up fake trades and entering them for reporting, but they all seemed to believe that Madoff was doing something with the account funds and just needed something to report. Fraudulent? Yes. Conspiracy with Madoff? No.
I've blogged what I could determine of it all as the story unwound last year.
Was Bernie Madoff really running a Ponzi scheme?
http://www.justiceforchandra.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3875
rd
Since when does a Hello World program not actually output anything?
Maybe they should call it Hello 42, I can see you with a debugger?
I can assure you, we've had to deal with multiple cases where just a minor version step of an IBM mainframe compiler resulted in failing code, requiring a rewrite using alternate methods.
Interesting. Thanks for the info.
rd
If you think it's that simple, you've never had to use it...
I've been on some of the largest IBM AS/400's running multi-billion dollar companies for twenty years, but not mainframes. However the largest AS/400 ranks with largest mainframes.
There's something like 10 different levels of issues with running old programs on a newer mainframe.
The old OS may not run on a newer mainframe. Perhaps because of devices that weren't available a half century ago, or what-not.
Binaries of everything written in last 40 years still runs on current AS/400 iseries, up to newest OS 6.1, where a recompile would be necessary for older programs. I've seen lots in technical press that implies twenty year old mainframe binaries running on newer mainframes, for example IBM CASE system. Perhaps the new mainframes purchased couldn't run the old software after all, if you know that as a fact.
Even if IBM was so nice as to add that support to a slightly newer version of the same (old) OS, it doesn't guarantee that it won't have been changed enough that your old, very low-level programs just don't quite run right.
Not slightly newer, it would have to be currently supported OS versions.
And even if they do, we're talking about the days when the simplest changes to an application typically require recompiling a binary.
Are you a mainframe veteran? OS/400 software has never needed a recompile, even when the AS/400 went from 48 bit CISC to 64 bit RISC in mid nineties.
The compiler originally used may be available for the newer system, but have a few subtle differences that make it not quite work.
You don't sound like an IBM mainframe veteran.
A just-slightly-newer compiler may be the only thing available, and it will have changed significantly enough to ensure several of your old programs won't compile.
My understanding of things like the IBM CASE system is that the compilers for some of the language used for the code is no longer available, but if available, IBM compilers of different levels are not rewritten and slightly different.
And don't dare mention IBM support. They're HEAVILY geared towards newer equipment. They don't have top-experts in each and every version of each and every bit of obsolete software just lying around, waiting for you to call.
No truer words ever spoken.
Now, maybe if the government threw enough money at IBM, they might perform better, but I have a hard time seeing it even then. We certainly pay them several times more than the combined salaries of the handful of mainframe experts in the company, all for the one problem that crops up every 5 years, and all the support we ever get is: "Try a newer version. No good? Well feature X was depreciated when this program was written 40 years ago, and is now unsupported."
The government has thrown boatloads of money at IBM in desperate attempts to keep ancient systems working. Even with that, IBM more than once has responded that they don't have anyone anymore that knows anything about it. Whether that's playing hardball or not, it's probably true. They could get the expertise from retirees if needed though, so more in the realm of F-U hardball in my opinion.
rd
Billions of dollars sunk into failed projects, and yet the government bureaucrats keep hiring these consulting companies for software work. Therefore they share a large part of the blame: at the least it shows incompetence and negligence, at worse it implies collusion and fraud.
Yes, although I know that both parties really would like a successful project. But there is no penalty for failure, and they keep sinking billions into failed software projects with the same giant consultig companies, so it is nothing short of collusion and fraud.
rd
You always expect the AS400 to be a bit more impressive the way the AS400 guys would talk about it. Then one day I walked into the room where it was kept and had to stifle a laugh.
true, the electronics have become much smaller through the years. Even the ones that run multi-billion dollar companies that I work on are not behemoths.
I have a 270 that can handle quite a load in my apartment. Also new large Linux and Windows servers and my AS/400 270 is only about three times the size of a PC server. I have a larger AS/400 825 stored in the garage as it requires two 220 volt hookups and I don't have that extra capacity in my apartment.
rd
An AS400 is a mid-range, not a mainframe...
although the highest end AS/400 system i or system p (OS/400 or AIX) the 595 now 795 ranks with the largest IBM mainframe.
rd
These jackoffs would have us believe it's going to cost $180 million to replace some bullshit law enforcement database software that's 20 years old?
The rated you funny, but it's true. FBI CASE system also vintage 1980's mainframe system. They have tried and failed twice to rewrite 20 year old law enforcement database software at over half a billion spent so far. First time they said they didn't even have anything salvageable to show for it and threw out the entire project which aos happened to be around that magic number of $180 million. (These are mind boggling numbers. The beltway bandits and their bureaucrat sponsors are capable of sinking unfathomable amounts of money into failed software projects.)
As has been noted in previous posts, newer IBM hardware runs the older software, so it shouldn't be ancient hardware falling apart as is implied here. I haven't read TFA to see if there's any detail behind what exactly is failing 1/3 of the time because generally there's no detail and what there is I mostly don't believe.
People blame the government bureaucrats, but the failed work is done by the huge consulting companies. They can blame the specs but the failures are for nearly every major software system for the last 20 years, several multiple time failures, and several still not replaced or working.
This sounds to me like the bureaucrats are raising the level of lying in a competition for what's the most desperate government software system needing replaced.
rd
I might be wrong, because it's a complex system, but the government each year is spending around 20% of the GDP (although really it doesn't collect anywhere near that amount in taxes). So I'm going to say that the 12% tax rate is not going to be enough.
The 12% or so equivalent figure came from a Flat Tax organization. I don't have the details of the calculation but they've obviously put a lot of thought into it. I don't believe the GDP spending comparison is valid because of the deficit spending as you mention.
rd
Going out on your own may not yield the best results up front, but once you get a somewhat stable client base you are basically secure.
and why are consultants not even easier to outsource overseas?
rd
That would help a lot, and I don't care that eight and ate would be spelled the same.
You can do what you want, but no one is going to read what you have to say spelling words like they sound. Your choice, their choice.
rd
My preference is a single graded income tax scale with no exemptions, no hidden payroll taxes, no sneaky deductions (those mostly favor the rich). We can set it up so poor people pay a lower percentage, and rich people pay a higher percentage.
I suggest everyone who has income gets a 40 x minimum wage deductible from income. Tax over that is flat rate. I saw a 12+ percent rate the other day as the flat rate equivalent to current taxation. With minimum wage deduction I expect it would be 14 percent or so for everyone.
One of the main hurdles would be loss of mortgage and child exemptions, that sort of thing, but if it was clear there were no exemptions for anyone and none that Congress could pass without invalidating the system and requiring Congress to be lined up in front of a firing squad, then I believe most people would agree with this and support it enthusiastically.
But it will take a strong bit of persuasion to take Congress' ability to extort kickbacks with tax loopholes and bribe voters with tax cut gimmicks away. Like voting in new members who endorse this as part of a reset of the ongoing mess.
rd
I don't see any reason to pay taxes - they already TAKE TAX out of my check before I ever get it. Fuck paying them anything extra.
You are aware exactly how all that works, right?...
Based on his comment, I doubt it.
rd
I don't know why on earth you would say "job security was lower" because contractors at least always had a defined term of work and only in the most extreme circumstances would you be able to get rid of them even if you as an employee thought they sucked. Meanwhile at any moment Hammer Of Rightsizing could come down on you as an employee.
In all the cases I've seen through the years, consultants were first to go in budget cutbacks, not employee layoffs and keep the contractors.
rd
They become a lot shallower when you can look at the source code.
yes, i5/OS as well immediately available, although now that we're past Power 5 and 6, IBM is calling it i...something or other totally inane.
I think I'll just stick with i5/OS.
rd
since when do laws stop the bad guys?
I find it hard that someone works at a workplace for 10 years, and then quits when they replace the sofa.
He may not have even had a sofa, before or after. It was code phrase at EA that you're not spending enough hours at work, in other words, a veiled warning. He had a choice of spending more time at work or spend it looking for another job. He chose the latter.
The details were all there.
rd
Kind of makes you wonder who wrote those words, eh? Or is Hilary the only politician without writers?
Hillary is a smart gal. She didn't need a writer to write that.
She does however have a Secretary of State staff that she would coordinate with on developing US policy.
If you had heard a few of the speeches she makes without notes, you would know that that is the way she talks and writes.
rd
... that's where 100% of them come from!!!
80%+ of attacks I see come from China and (former) Soviet Union. Why block the rest of the world when the bulk of the attacks come from there?
And so, yes, I block IP address blocks from China and (former) Soviet Union. The noise to signal ratio is such that there's no signal.
rd
Am I the only person who refuses to believe something purely on the grounds that it makes me angry? These aren't unreasonable questions.
Probably. And you got insightful for not knowing anything about it as well. So maybe you're not the only one.
The attacks came from IP addresses used by the Chinese government. Yes, sophisticated crackers could hijack the IP addresses and pretend they are the Chinese government by breaking into Chinese political activist gmail accounts just to make you right, but I doubt it.
rd
well I will add to the compost heap today. When I read the headline, I thought that it may be a more fundamental learning of use and relationship of words and what they describe than what TFA describes. Colleges are in a university is a "trusted relationship"? How very ignorant and disappointing, as every AI project I've ever read about is.
What would be impressive is to form associations as in a list of universities including Carnegie-Melon, or a statement that Carnegie-Melon is a university, then in other text that Carnegie-Melon consists of seven colleges to draw an association of university made up of colleges. A human review of such associations could then add a "trusted" attribute, or multiple statements associating university "made up" or "consists of" or other similar phrases with colleges, students, faculty, and a host of other associations would numerically become probable with multiple instances encountered for a self scoring "probable relationship".
But hand holding "trusted relationships" for the researchers personal domain is pathetic.
rd
If you're stupid enough to refuse upgrading a major component of your system just because you don't think you're using it, well, then you deserve what you get.
You weren't addressing to me directly, but *I* wasn't using it, I just found out from the poster's informative post that Adobe Acrobat Reader was using it.
Rather than upgrade something I can't get rid of, I will be uninstalling Acrobat Reader and anything else that uses it.
So le's rephrase that to anything stupid enough to not use my default browser without my permission deserves to be uninstalled.
rd