Let me get your point straight, because COBOL is an old language, you believe calling out misinformation that shows the people tasked with “finding corruption and financial mismanagement” are completely unqualified for the job isn’t a “valid defense”?
A valid defense of what? The post doesn’t defend COBOL, it makes no claims regarding the best way to track this data at all. It just points out that the dipshits making the claims of corruption are blatantly wrong.
Then you go on to claim that these same dipshits are going to “probably” address legacy systems? Why would you want someone who can’t understand the legacy system to be in charge of replacing it? That’s a recipe for disaster.
Or to put it another way. Saying the government shouldn’t use COBOL “isn’t the defense (of DOGE) you think it is”.
Defending COBOL would require a statement to the effect of “COBOL should be kept because X”. Do you see any affirmative statement to that effect? No? Wanna take a guess as to why?
I know you won’t be honest about it in your response, but you know exactly why. Because this post has nothing to do with COBOL being good, bad, or in-between for the task at hand. It’s exclusively about calling out bullshit and misinformation spread by unqualified idiots.
Which brings me back around to the fact that your opinion that “COBOL should be replaced” is not a valid defense of idiots, who don’t understand the systems they are tasked with using, making false claims based on misunderstandings caused by their ignorance.
No it’s not. It’s that they are afraid of all of the waste and corruption being exposed and losing control. They don’t care about misinformation, they spread the most misinformation
Let me get your point straight, because COBOL is an old language, you believe calling out misinformation that shows the people tasked with “finding corruption and financial mismanagement” are completely unqualified for the job isn’t a “valid defense”?
A valid defense of what? The post doesn’t defend COBOL, it makes no claims regarding the best way to track this data at all. It just points out that the dipshits making the claims of corruption are blatantly wrong.
Then you go on to claim that these same dipshits are going to “probably” address legacy systems? Why would you want someone who can’t understand the legacy system to be in charge of replacing it? That’s a recipe for disaster.
Or to put it another way. Saying the government shouldn’t use COBOL “isn’t the defense (of DOGE) you think it is”.
Yes, it is defending cobol. Otherwise it would say this is bad and needs to be fixed
Lol, bruh… You cant be serious.
Defending COBOL would require a statement to the effect of “COBOL should be kept because X”. Do you see any affirmative statement to that effect? No? Wanna take a guess as to why?
I know you won’t be honest about it in your response, but you know exactly why. Because this post has nothing to do with COBOL being good, bad, or in-between for the task at hand. It’s exclusively about calling out bullshit and misinformation spread by unqualified idiots.
Which brings me back around to the fact that your opinion that “COBOL should be replaced” is not a valid defense of idiots, who don’t understand the systems they are tasked with using, making false claims based on misunderstandings caused by their ignorance.
No it’s not. It’s that they are afraid of all of the waste and corruption being exposed and losing control. They don’t care about misinformation, they spread the most misinformation
Well, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make them think.