patrick.net

corntrollio says

PolishKnight says

This kind of attention to inane detail reminds me of my dealing with security auditors.

Nice attempt to detract from your made-up anecdote, but okay -- I'm more than fine with having attention to detail.

I'll name names in my "made up" anecdote and you can say that these are fictional too. Here goes:

The company was Freddie Mac and the modem was in place to receive the orders and go through JCL to the IBM mainframe. I don't know which series the mainframe was. I did see the modem though and it was running with link lights present and that's what the guy who ported that application to TCP/IP told me. He wrote a wrapper to take orders from a connection stream and send it to the order module that was running on JCL and also COBOL. The modem has now been decommissioned.

The project to convert the mainframe/JCL/COBOL applications was called Advantage (you can google this on linked in) and supposed to cost about 30 million (that's the number I heard). TCS/TATA was the agency. After 10 million, the code generated by TATA was bad so they cancelled but didn't get the money back. The mainframe was then outsourced to CGI Federal.

But I made that all up. OK.

PolishKnight says

The modem has now been decommissioned.

You didn't even say what year this was for one thing, and second, you didn't really explain why it was unique.

Just as an example, it wasn't that long ago that banks were still sending ACH transactions via uploading a text file via FTP. They might still be doing so, in fact. Any attempt to change the status quo here would necessarily be a large infrastructure project.

Pretending that outdated, but simple, systems that work are limited to government is silly. Pretending that large infrastructure projects to replace legacy systems are limited to government is also silly. Pretending that some of these infrastructure projects running into problems and cost overruns is limited to government is silly too. All of these things occur among many large institutions with legacy systems. In fact, the whole Y2K thing was premised on exactly this.

You gave this anecdote as evidence for a cheap political point, when in reality, this kind of stuff happens everywhere all the time, private and public sector. I wasn't really intending to point this out, because most of the posts on this thread have turned into drivel, but you kept badgering me about a line that was originally meant to be a joke and was never originally intended to be critical of your argument. :)

http://www.wfs.org/futurist/2014-issues-futurist/july-august-2014-vol-48-no-4/what-does-moore%E2%80%99s-law-mean-for-rest-socie

Excerpt from article ...

"Businesses are charged with making profits (and in this economy, surviving). Their disposition toward job creation is, “You’ve gotta be kidding. I’m trying to stay in business.”

The next time you think about job creation, try a little word exchange: Replace the word jobs with the term payroll expense. Try it and see how it feels to say this: “We need more payroll expense!” or “Why haven’t you created more payroll expense?!” It sounds weird, doesn’t it?

That’s what is truly relevant, because that’s how a potential employer sees the labor force. If a company is in survival mode, its goal is to increase profitability, not to create jobs.

The disconnect between governmental goals of creating jobs through spending and other stimulus and the virtually opposite goals of those who are expected to do the heavy lifting that solves the unemployment problem (the private sector) is undoubtedly the most confounding economic enigma today."

Rin says

The disconnect between governmental goals of creating jobs through spending and other stimulus and the virtually opposite goals of those who are expected to do the heavy lifting that solves the unemployment problem (the private sector) is undoubtedly the most confounding economic enigma today."

And that is at the very core. Government is completely fucking irrelevant to creating jobs. We need to get completely rid of these, now you are supposed to ass wipes, and allow business to do what it does. Jobs will follow.

Rin says

When a South African (w/ US citizenship) applies for a scholarship, as an African-American, usually some photo has to follow.

What's preventing you from using a photo of a black person to get the scholarship?

zzyzzx says

Rin says

When a South African (w/ US citizenship) applies for a scholarship, as an African-American, usually some photo has to follow.

What's preventing you from using a photo of a black person to get the scholarship?

As in Laurence Olivier here ...

Last I'd checked, Olivier was a white-Britisher, not a Sudanese actor.

All it takes is a good makeup artist.

Rin says

If a company is in survival mode, its goal is to increase profitability, not to create jobs.

That's always true, not just in survival mode. Companies love to run chronically understaffed for as long as they can get away with it.

The only exception are the empire builders. Those managers for whom headcount is power. Generally those people are shed as the empire crumbles.

New Renter says

Rin says

If a company is in survival mode, its goal is to increase profitability, not to create jobs.

That's always true, not just in survival mode. Companies love to run chronically understaffed for as long as they can get away with it.

The only exception are the empire builders. Those managers for whom headcount is power. Generally those people are shed as the empire crumbles.

Well, the real point is that headcount, is a continuous operating cost. And in the end, corporations want to reduce costs.

Thus, the whole notion of hiring, given the proliferation of information technologies, is becoming the contradiction of the times ahead.

indigenous says

And that is at the very core. Government is completely fucking irrelevant to creating jobs. We need to get completely rid of these, now you are supposed to ass wipes, and allow business to do what it does. Jobs will follow.

Govt will keep ppl off the streets.

Corporations, as information tech uses more expert systems, will generate profits, using less headcount.

And thus, jobs will not follow, at least not starting 2025-2035. Today, we're in a bit of a transition phase before that new era of diminishing work.

Rin says

Corporations, as information tech uses more expert systems, will generate profits, using less headcount.

At one time farming employed 95% of the work force now it is less than 5%. Same with manufacturing. If what you say is true we would have 100% unemployment.

The real problem is the bailouts prevented the market from clearing out and starts up from growing.

A contributor factor is that China devalued the Yuan for the past 20 years.

Another factor is demographics.

Rin says

Govt will keep ppl off the streets

One way or another the labor problems will be solved.