NO. Getting re-elected depends, somewhat, on being able to keep the promises you made. Somewhat, because all politicians know that voters like being lied to, and as long as you are telling voters the lies they want to hear, you can get re-elected repeatedly without ever fulfilling all your promises. This should not be news to anyone that lives in a democracy.
10 posts • joined 14 Jul 2017
Re: Easily solved
The system was also designed to encourage creation of 2 broad parties of the political center that would differ on certain policies but were able to compromise on legislation. They were not meant to be ideological opponents. What you see now is a dysfunctional party system where the parties have become ideologically extreme with supporters often viewing compromise as betrayal. In a system designed to require compromise between separate power centers (Senate, House, and President), ideology preventing compromise is the cause for dysfunction. How the parties became ideological is a separate and important discussion.
Re: Hypocrisy 101
Trump frequently criticized everything as that built a case for him to attack that that institution later if it was to his benefit to do so. No different from birther attacks on Obama or using "fake news" to attack the media or his attack on the legitimacy of the overall voting process. Don't pay attention to attacks like this from the clown.
The organization I work for outsources technical work. The contract with the vendor included increased payments as they built experience in our applications. Some years into the contract when we asked for details of who was working on the contract, the only resources with more than 2 years experience were the 3 resources we insisted stay on site - they had been in place for 5 years and were very knowledgeable. We were paying for a constant training cycle for the churn of the other employees and this was often reflected in the quality of response and code. This situation would have been a nightmare without the long-term employees acting as mentors/senior consultants.
If IBM is going to cycle everyone every two years, their clients should ask for a discount as the quality of support is about to decrease. IBM should consider some long-term support roles in support of the "churn" whether that is due to the industry or their own HR mandates.
When tyrants pull on their jackboots to stamp out free speech online, they reach for... er, a Canadian software biz?
Re: Right to information?
Well if they are breaking international law then the international policeman should arrest them and try and convict them before the international court. Oh wait, there is no international police? Not everyone agrees with the ICC as a valid court? Is there a codified book of international law?
Gee wiz, that could be a problem when people keep saying someone is breaking "international law" - as if that really meant something.
Re: Legacy Systems
Those core account systems are not the problem nor is COBOL the problem. The security problem exists in all the layers of code added to allow access from phone, or internet or mobile. No one accesses a COBOL based banking system directly (do you see a CICS screen on your phone?) When security fails in one of those user-friendly interface layers then what is presented to that back-end account system is what looks like a valid user. The legacy system is not your security problem. Replacing is an impossible task if what you will say to a business person is: Give me $250 Miliion dollars and 5 years and I will give you exactly what you have now, except newer. What is the business value in that? You will never get that funding so those old systems will remain in place until the hardware is no longer manufactured - and that may be never. Better to spend a fraction of that $250MM properly securing (or rebuilding securely) those "front-end" layers.
Uh, this is directors investigating directors. I suspect all they could do was review the public facts about meetings and timings. They are not the police or the SEC - did they check everyone else trading (relatives, friends, etc...) for others that might have known? Did they subpoena phone or message logs, speak to brokers and other staff and many other activities only government investigators can do? WHITEWASH!!! Worse still, the dummies now may be considered to have colluded in a cover-up. I await the SEC's investigation.
Re: They need more than just this
It would be very expensive to build and operate the hardware required for mining in space. Where do you think funds are coming from for hardware for pirates? I can see it now: "Here's $5BN to build ships and armaments. Try to break even in the first year." All sarcasm aside, I look forward to the day when space travel is so common and inexpensive that piracy is a problem. I think the concern is a bit premature though.