4 ms·

> What has followed is people coming out of the woodwork to explain how this may have been reflected in the system since the system was written in COBOL There’

> What has followed is people coming out of the woodwork to explain how this may have been reflected in the system since the system was written in COBOL There’s zero evidence these “people coming out of the woodwork” have any idea what they are actually talking about. No evidence they have ever worked for SSA or have any insider info on how its systems work. It appears these “people coming out of the woodwork” are just random nobodies speculating in public (likely incorrectly), and people are repeating their speculation because they like how it sounds and they don’t know enough about the topic to realise that it probably isn’t true

computerthings 2y ago
[flagged]
- jklinger410 2y ago
  If you thought this was some kind of roast against one side, do me a favor and think about it for the opposite. That's what good posting vague quotes about totalitarianism does. You have to engage in specifics for your communication to be meaningful.
  - computerthings 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - jklinger410 2y ago
      Well if I can't tell what side you are criticizing with your broad quotes then my point is they aren't really effective. Which is why I said posting vague quotes about totalitarianism doesn't really do much.
      - computerthings 2y ago
        That something has to be applicable to only one "side" is a goal of your own making, not mine.
        Dylan16807 2y ago
        They didn't say that. And they're right, if we can't tell what your quote is aimed at, then your post is not doing a good job.
        computerthings 2y ago
        [flagged]
        Dylan16807 2y ago
        Multiple people calling your post unclear is a request for you to explain. Even if they don't use a question mark.
        computerthings 2y ago
        [flagged]
        skissane 2y ago
        > > random nobodies speculating in public (likely incorrectly), and people are repeating their speculation because they like how it sounds > That made me think of how Arendt described the pre-totalitarian mishmash of opinions and totalitarian "opinions" [0], that's the first quote. Allow me to clarify what I was saying: there is no inherent problem with “random nobodies” speculating about things - I am myself a “random nobody” in this context. The problem is when people start talking about those pseudonymous speculations as if they were coming from genuine life experience with this particular computer system, or closely related computer systems-which is what I interpreted the comment I was replying to as claiming (or at least it could be read as implying it). Furthermore, while both I and the sources for these speculations are “random nobodies”, I’d say I’m a much more informed random nobody, because I’ve read enough COBOL documentation to realise that what they are saying is of dubious plausibility, whereas it appears they haven’t. That’s not to say I’m endorsing Musk’s claims about “150 year old social security recipients”-I don’t know what the actual truth behind them is (and I don’t think anyone else publicly discussing them does either), but I think more likely than not they are an exaggeration, distortion or misinterpretation - so I do think they are probably (at least partially) wrong - but (outside a small cohort of current and former government officials and contractors, who likely are restrained by confidentiality obligations from participating in the public debate) nobody knows exactly how and why they are wrong - but I know enough about COBOL to know that COBOL-centric theories about why Musk is wrong are very likely themselves wrong. And finally, replying to someone’s comment with quotes - without any explanation of why you think the quotes are relevant to the comment you are replying to - isn’t a helpful communication style. Rather than leaving people guessing at what you are trying to say-or leaving them with the onus of asking you to clarify-much better to just explain it explicitly in your initial reply. Plus, I have the suspicion that your reply was triggered by a misunderstanding of my position - that you were reading me as saying “Musk is right”, when what I’ve actually been saying (not explicitly in that particular comment, but I think it becomes clearer if you read my other comments on the topic) is “Musk could well be wrong-indeed more likely than not he is-but not for this reason”

computerthings 2y ago

[flagged]

jklinger410 2y ago
If you thought this was some kind of roast against one side, do me a favor and think about it for the opposite. That's what good posting vague quotes about totalitarianism does. You have to engage in specifics for your communication to be meaningful.
- computerthings 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - jklinger410 2y ago
    Well if I can't tell what side you are criticizing with your broad quotes then my point is they aren't really effective. Which is why I said posting vague quotes about totalitarianism doesn't really do much.
    - computerthings 2y ago
      That something has to be applicable to only one "side" is a goal of your own making, not mine.
      - Dylan16807 2y ago
        They didn't say that. And they're right, if we can't tell what your quote is aimed at, then your post is not doing a good job.
        computerthings 2y ago
        [flagged]
        Dylan16807 2y ago
        Multiple people calling your post unclear is a request for you to explain. Even if they don't use a question mark.
        computerthings 2y ago
        [flagged]
        skissane 2y ago
        > > random nobodies speculating in public (likely incorrectly), and people are repeating their speculation because they like how it sounds > That made me think of how Arendt described the pre-totalitarian mishmash of opinions and totalitarian "opinions" [0], that's the first quote. Allow me to clarify what I was saying: there is no inherent problem with “random nobodies” speculating about things - I am myself a “random nobody” in this context. The problem is when people start talking about those pseudonymous speculations as if they were coming from genuine life experience with this particular computer system, or closely related computer systems-which is what I interpreted the comment I was replying to as claiming (or at least it could be read as implying it). Furthermore, while both I and the sources for these speculations are “random nobodies”, I’d say I’m a much more informed random nobody, because I’ve read enough COBOL documentation to realise that what they are saying is of dubious plausibility, whereas it appears they haven’t. That’s not to say I’m endorsing Musk’s claims about “150 year old social security recipients”-I don’t know what the actual truth behind them is (and I don’t think anyone else publicly discussing them does either), but I think more likely than not they are an exaggeration, distortion or misinterpretation - so I do think they are probably (at least partially) wrong - but (outside a small cohort of current and former government officials and contractors, who likely are restrained by confidentiality obligations from participating in the public debate) nobody knows exactly how and why they are wrong - but I know enough about COBOL to know that COBOL-centric theories about why Musk is wrong are very likely themselves wrong. And finally, replying to someone’s comment with quotes - without any explanation of why you think the quotes are relevant to the comment you are replying to - isn’t a helpful communication style. Rather than leaving people guessing at what you are trying to say-or leaving them with the onus of asking you to clarify-much better to just explain it explicitly in your initial reply. Plus, I have the suspicion that your reply was triggered by a misunderstanding of my position - that you were reading me as saying “Musk is right”, when what I’ve actually been saying (not explicitly in that particular comment, but I think it becomes clearer if you read my other comments on the topic) is “Musk could well be wrong-indeed more likely than not he is-but not for this reason”