https://www.dailymail.co.uk/yourmoney/taxes/article-13688929/IRS-worker-reveals-reasons-call-hold-tax-delays.html

Decades-old computer systems 'paid for by the Kennedy
administration' and terrible management are the reasons
for poor customer service at the IRS, an insider has claimed.

An IRS employee, who has worked at the agency for more than
a decade, has spoken exclusively to DailyMail.com about
its failings, as it comes under fire for long call wait
times.

The staffer, who has worked on the customer service and IT
teams, said that managers pursued 'vanity projects' instead
of making changes which would benefit workers and taxpayers.

.. . .

Doesn't surprise me.

Hmm ... what was good in the very early 60s ?
IBM had a number of offerings, esp it's new
and great System/360. The article did not
specify WHAT 'ancient' computers.

Of interest here is that such old tech DOES
still WORK. Most of this stuff was still
discrete transistors in BIG boxes.

Yea, yea, the modern stuff is 1000s of times
faster and more compact. I think a Raspberry Pi
credit-card computer is a lot faster and more
capable. Modern stuff may not AS reliable however.

However there's ANOTHER issue ... one guys I knew
in the biz even yet come across. It's the SOFTWARE.

A lot of it was written in COBOL by those arrow-tie
Dilberts LONG ago. It's GREAT software - those square-
lookin' nerd guys were REALLY GOOD.

But good software requires good MONEY ... and a lot
of biz/govt entities can't afford having the good
old standards re-created for modern hardware. Can
barely afford (or find) people who can do little
patches on what is.

So, they can't afford to, don't DARE to, replace that
60 year old hardware and software. It works, so
LEAVE IT ALONE.

Heh ... I remember visiting a county facility when
I was still pretty young. The computer room was
freezing and the floor was laser-leveled for the
benefit of the old-style disk drive units (and
I mean "units", you could physically remove a
big spool of about 12" wide disks - DO wait until
they stop spinning !). There were also the boxes
with the spinning tapes and the obligatory card
and paper-tape readers.

The "cpu chip" was about a cubic METER in size in
the middle of the room - DEC I think, PDP-4 or
maybe PDP-7 - full of a bunch of circuit boards with
zillions of individual transistors and perhaps a
few early "chips". Workers/programmers had serial
terminals at their desks.

Even then the machine was technically obsolete,
early PCs were already starting to come out, but
again they could not afford/dare to replace it.
50s/60s easy money had RUN OUT.

BTW, if you're a COBOL guru you can make GOOD
money these days maintaining all that old
software ... it's in Big Govt all the way down
to medium local biz.

On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 22:01:12 -0400, "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net>
wrote in <kcOcnV96BcJ0yFz7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@earthlink.com>:

> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/yourmoney/taxes/article-13688929/IRS-worker-
reveals-reasons-call-hold-tax-delays.html
>
> Decades-old computer systems 'paid for by the Kennedy administration'
> and terrible management are the reasons for poor customer service at the
> IRS, an insider has claimed.
>
> An IRS employee, who has worked at the agency for more than a decade,
> has spoken exclusively to DailyMail.com about its failings, as it comes
> under fire for long call wait times.
>
> The staffer, who has worked on the customer service and IT teams, said
> that managers pursued 'vanity projects' instead of making changes which
> would benefit workers and taxpayers.
>
> . . .
>
> Doesn't surprise me.
>
> Hmm ... what was good in the very early 60s ?
> IBM had a number of offerings, esp it's new and great System/360. The
> article did not specify WHAT 'ancient' computers.
>
> Of interest here is that such old tech DOES still WORK. Most of this
> stuff was still discrete transistors in BIG boxes.
>
> Yea, yea, the modern stuff is 1000s of times faster and more compact.
> I think a Raspberry Pi credit-card computer is a lot faster and more
> capable. Modern stuff may not AS reliable however.
>
> However there's ANOTHER issue ... one guys I knew in the biz even yet
> come across. It's the SOFTWARE.
>
> A lot of it was written in COBOL by those arrow-tie Dilberts LONG
> ago. It's GREAT software - those square-
> lookin' nerd guys were REALLY GOOD.
>
> But good software requires good MONEY ... and a lot of biz/govt
> entities can't afford having the good old standards re-created for
> modern hardware. Can barely afford (or find) people who can do little
> patches on what is.
>
> So, they can't afford to, don't DARE to, replace that 60 year old
> hardware and software. It works, so LEAVE IT ALONE.
>
> Heh ... I remember visiting a county facility when I was still pretty
> young. The computer room was freezing and the floor was laser-leveled
> for the benefit of the old-style disk drive units (and I mean
> "units", you could physically remove a big spool of about 12" wide
> disks - DO wait until they stop spinning !). There were also the
> boxes with the spinning tapes and the obligatory card and paper-tape
> readers.
>
> The "cpu chip" was about a cubic METER in size in the middle of the
> room - DEC I think, PDP-4 or maybe PDP-7 - full of a bunch of circuit
> boards with zillions of individual transistors and perhaps a few
> early "chips". Workers/programmers had serial terminals at their
> desks.
>
> Even then the machine was technically obsolete,
> early PCs were already starting to come out, but again they could not
> afford/dare to replace it. 50s/60s easy money had RUN OUT.
>
> BTW, if you're a COBOL guru you can make GOOD money these days
> maintaining all that old software ... it's in Big Govt all the way
> down to medium local biz.

If you're so inclined to learn on your own...GNU has COBOL.

COBC(1) User Commands COBC(1)

NAME
cobc - manual page for cobc 3.1.2.0

SYNOPSIS
cobc [options]... file...

DESCRIPTION
GnuCOBOL compiler for most COBOL dialects with lots of
extensions
_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Our local community college used to have a COBOL class, as it led
a software consortium that ran COBOL software on mainframes. Looks
like they retired those old systems in 2009.

--
-v

On 8/17/24 10:24 PM, vallor wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 22:01:12 -0400, "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net>
> wrote in <kcOcnV96BcJ0yFz7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@earthlink.com>:
>
>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/yourmoney/taxes/article-13688929/IRS-worker-
> reveals-reasons-call-hold-tax-delays.html
>>
>> Decades-old computer systems 'paid for by the Kennedy administration'
>> and terrible management are the reasons for poor customer service at the
>> IRS, an insider has claimed.
>>
>> An IRS employee, who has worked at the agency for more than a decade,
>> has spoken exclusively to DailyMail.com about its failings, as it comes
>> under fire for long call wait times.
>>
>> The staffer, who has worked on the customer service and IT teams, said
>> that managers pursued 'vanity projects' instead of making changes which
>> would benefit workers and taxpayers.
>>
>> . . .
>>
>> Doesn't surprise me.
>>
>> Hmm ... what was good in the very early 60s ?
>> IBM had a number of offerings, esp it's new and great System/360. The
>> article did not specify WHAT 'ancient' computers.
>>
>> Of interest here is that such old tech DOES still WORK. Most of this
>> stuff was still discrete transistors in BIG boxes.
>>
>> Yea, yea, the modern stuff is 1000s of times faster and more compact.
>> I think a Raspberry Pi credit-card computer is a lot faster and more
>> capable. Modern stuff may not AS reliable however.
>>
>> However there's ANOTHER issue ... one guys I knew in the biz even yet
>> come across. It's the SOFTWARE.
>>
>> A lot of it was written in COBOL by those arrow-tie Dilberts LONG
>> ago. It's GREAT software - those square-
>> lookin' nerd guys were REALLY GOOD.
>>
>> But good software requires good MONEY ... and a lot of biz/govt
>> entities can't afford having the good old standards re-created for
>> modern hardware. Can barely afford (or find) people who can do little
>> patches on what is.
>>
>> So, they can't afford to, don't DARE to, replace that 60 year old
>> hardware and software. It works, so LEAVE IT ALONE.
>>
>> Heh ... I remember visiting a county facility when I was still pretty
>> young. The computer room was freezing and the floor was laser-leveled
>> for the benefit of the old-style disk drive units (and I mean
>> "units", you could physically remove a big spool of about 12" wide
>> disks - DO wait until they stop spinning !). There were also the
>> boxes with the spinning tapes and the obligatory card and paper-tape
>> readers.
>>
>> The "cpu chip" was about a cubic METER in size in the middle of the
>> room - DEC I think, PDP-4 or maybe PDP-7 - full of a bunch of circuit
>> boards with zillions of individual transistors and perhaps a few
>> early "chips". Workers/programmers had serial terminals at their
>> desks.
>>
>> Even then the machine was technically obsolete,
>> early PCs were already starting to come out, but again they could not
>> afford/dare to replace it. 50s/60s easy money had RUN OUT.
>>
>> BTW, if you're a COBOL guru you can make GOOD money these days
>> maintaining all that old software ... it's in Big Govt all the way
>> down to medium local biz.
>
> If you're so inclined to learn on your own...GNU has COBOL.
>
> COBC(1) User Commands COBC(1)
>
> NAME
> cobc - manual page for cobc 3.1.2.0
>
> SYNOPSIS
> cobc [options]... file...
>
> DESCRIPTION
> GnuCOBOL compiler for most COBOL dialects with lots of
> extensions
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Our local community college used to have a COBOL class, as it led
> a software consortium that ran COBOL software on mainframes. Looks
> like they retired those old systems in 2009.

I'm gonna be heretical and say GNU isn't Real COBOL ... it's
just a 'C' translator. There ARE some native COBOL compilers,
even a sort of IDE, out there however.

If you're gonna do Old Systems then you HAVE to be able to set
the compiler to respect the OLD standards ... various kinds of
fields/instructions/data start at SPECIFIC PLACES ... which
corresponded with the old punch-cards. "Relaxed" more modern
COBOL/FORTRAN ... great ... but that may NOT get you anywhere
on an actual early 60s system.

I just installed a new box (little BMax) and DID install the
GNU COBOL and FORTRAN (and even 'D' and Modula-2 Just Because).
Even a FORTH compiler ... like to have all bases covered :-)

I'll skip ADA ... DID write some kinda complex-ish stuff for
ADA with self-updating lists of linked lists of linked lists ...
but the data TYPING is just TOO - had to write some 'cheat'
translator functions. Too much ... software should not
work hard AGAINST you .......

On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 22:01:12 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> Hmm ... what was good in the very early 60s ?
> IBM had a number of offerings, esp it's new and great System/360. The
> article did not specify WHAT 'ancient' computers.

Depending on how literally you want to take 'Kennedy administration' it
would be a 7000 hopefully. At least that one had transistors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_700/7000_series

https://web.archive.org/web/20200119162242/http://blog.modernmechanix.com/
big-brother-7074-is-watching-you/

A contemporary article with a chilling vision of the future:

"Eventually, large corporations could also be plugged into the system.
Computers thousands of miles apart could talk taxes without any numbskull
human interference. Banks could be hooked in, too, reporting who is
getting interest payments. Real-estate and stock-market computers might
tattle on who is making money. Machines in charity organizations could
reveal amounts of donations. And hospital computers could report on
individual medical costs."

System/360 was announced in '64 but RPI had one of the first 360/30s in
'65 when I took my first programming class in FORTRAN IV. Kennedy was shot
in '63.

On 8/17/24 11:45 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 22:01:12 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> Hmm ... what was good in the very early 60s ?
>> IBM had a number of offerings, esp it's new and great System/360. The
>> article did not specify WHAT 'ancient' computers.
>
> Depending on how literally you want to take 'Kennedy administration' it
> would be a 7000 hopefully. At least that one had transistors.

Govt specs being what they are, it was PROBABLY tech at
least 5-7 years out of date.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_700/7000_series

The 7000 series were pretty GOOD computers, given
the state of the tech. There WERE a few competitors
however. As said, the article didn't specify.

Anyhow, clearly JUST beyond the vac-tube era since
those would be just TOO hard to maintain all this time.

> https://web.archive.org/web/20200119162242/http://blog.modernmechanix.com/
> big-brother-7074-is-watching-you/
>
> A contemporary article with a chilling vision of the future:
>
> "Eventually, large corporations could also be plugged into the system.
> Computers thousands of miles apart could talk taxes without any numbskull
> human interference. Banks could be hooked in, too, reporting who is
> getting interest payments. Real-estate and stock-market computers might
> tattle on who is making money. Machines in charity organizations could
> reveal amounts of donations. And hospital computers could report on
> individual medical costs."

Visionary ... and back when they STILL understood
all the DOWNSIDE.

But note that DIDN'T HELP - what was "just easier"
for govt/biz/banking CAME TO BE.

And now Russians/Chinese have the keys to that
whole kingdom.

NOT good at all.

And I do NOT know a good work-around. What, should
I keep a briefcase full of bearer bonds in some
obscure storage facility and just assume the owners
don't rifle through the contents ???

Again, NOT good !

Frankly, I think The West is goin' DOWN - and
right when I've gotten OLD. Hyper-suck !

> System/360 was announced in '64 but RPI had one of the first 360/30s in
> '65 when I took my first programming class in FORTRAN IV. Kennedy was shot
> in '63.

Which is why I suspect the 7000s.

BITS of 360 were to be had a bit earlier, but, as said,
govt contracts spend years working up their specs.

Once got a tour of a US attack sub. Their 'computer'
STILL used the big old disk-drive units where you
could remove entire spools of large disks ... early
60s tech in a boat built nearly two decades later.
Again, the govt-spec/contract process ...

followups trimmed to comp.os.linux.misc

In comp.os.linux.misc 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/yourmoney/taxes/article-13688929/IRS-worker-reveals-reasons-call-hold-tax-delays.html

A UK article discussing nothing it knows about :)

The main reasons for the delays are:
1. Tax Law change every year, the last few years big changes
have been made right before Tax Season begins. Leaving
little time for software changes and testing.
2. Funding cuts, the GOP has cut funding to such an extent that
the IRS cannot afford to audit the very rich. Never mind
upgrade systems. Granted Biden increased funding, but some
of it was cut again back due to a deal with the GOP.
3. Companies sending out Tax Documents later than the law
specifics. I am hit by this every year. I receive my
documents 1 month late, than means I cannot even start
filling out my Tax Form until April.
4. People waiting for the last minute to file their Tax (see
number 3).

For international people, US people must file their
forms by April 15.

> Decades-old computer systems 'paid for by the Kennedy
> administration' and terrible management are the reasons
> for poor customer service at the IRS, an insider has claimed.

I believe hardware has been upgraded over the years, IBM
Mainframes are very good keeping backward compatibility.

>
> An IRS employee, who has worked at the agency...

I had many relatives working there, most are issues are
due to the Tax Code changing every year plus Funding.

But I heard the IRS is adding a method for you to
submit your documents in some manner and they fill
out the forms for you.

<snip>

> Hmm ... what was good in the very early 60s ?
> IBM had a number of offerings, esp it's new
> and great System/360. The article did not
> specify WHAT 'ancient' computers.

No kidding.

<snip>

> So, they can't afford to, don't DARE to, replace that
> 60 year old hardware and software. It works, so
> LEAVE IT ALONE.

That seems to be what is happening. BTW, some of
the software is also written in FORTRAN :)

<snip>
>
> BTW, if you're a COBOL guru you can make GOOD
> money these days maintaining all that old
> software ... it's in Big Govt all the way down
> to medium local biz.

I hear the same, New York City is another place that needs
COBOL programmers + a knowledge of business rules.

--
[t]csh(1) - "An elegant shell, for a more... civilized age."
- Paraphrasing Star Wars

On 18 Aug 2024 03:45:42 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> A contemporary article with a chilling vision of the future:
>
> "Eventually, large corporations could also be plugged into the system.
> Computers thousands of miles apart could talk taxes without any
> numbskull human interference. Banks could be hooked in, too, reporting
> who is getting interest payments. Real-estate and stock-market computers
> might tattle on who is making money. Machines in charity organizations
> could reveal amounts of donations. And hospital computers could report
> on individual medical costs."

All routine nowadays. As is compliance with anti-money-laundering laws.
Which are governed by international agreements.

Also remember, the tax department (IRD or IRS or HMRC or SARS or whatever
it’s called in your country) is only concerned with collecting the proper
taxes. How you earn the money that incurs those taxes (even if through
illegal enterprises) is not its concern.

186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> An IRS employee, who has worked at the agency for more than
> a decade, has spoken exclusively to DailyMail

Shouldn't the Daily Mail be getting hot under the collar about HMRC
rather than the IRS?

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 09:39:38 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

> 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> An IRS employee, who has worked at the agency for more than a decade,
>> has spoken exclusively to DailyMail
>
> Shouldn't the Daily Mail be getting hot under the collar about HMRC
> rather than the IRS?

"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no
attention to the plank in your own eye?"

Matthew 7:3

Let's ignore Rotherham and focus on the DNC fiasco...

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 02:01:00 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 18 Aug 2024 03:45:42 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> A contemporary article with a chilling vision of the future:
>>
>> "Eventually, large corporations could also be plugged into the system.
>> Computers thousands of miles apart could talk taxes without any
>> numbskull human interference. Banks could be hooked in, too, reporting
>> who is getting interest payments. Real-estate and stock-market
>> computers might tattle on who is making money. Machines in charity
>> organizations could reveal amounts of donations. And hospital computers
>> could report on individual medical costs."
>
> All routine nowadays. As is compliance with anti-money-laundering laws.
> Which are governed by international agreements.

Yeah, the surveillance state is doing fine but the flying cars predicted
in 1963 never happened and there are some guys in orbit that hope they can
thumb a ride home someday.

On 8/19/24 4:59 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 02:01:00 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On 18 Aug 2024 03:45:42 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> A contemporary article with a chilling vision of the future:
>>>
>>> "Eventually, large corporations could also be plugged into the system.
>>> Computers thousands of miles apart could talk taxes without any
>>> numbskull human interference. Banks could be hooked in, too, reporting
>>> who is getting interest payments. Real-estate and stock-market
>>> computers might tattle on who is making money. Machines in charity
>>> organizations could reveal amounts of donations. And hospital computers
>>> could report on individual medical costs."
>>
>> All routine nowadays. As is compliance with anti-money-laundering laws.
>> Which are governed by international agreements.
>
> Yeah, the surveillance state is doing fine but the flying cars predicted
> in 1963 never happened and there are some guys in orbit that hope they can
> thumb a ride home someday.

I sent a mail to SpaceX urging them to paint
"Elon's Friendly Space Towing" with some hokey
little graphic on the side of the eventual
rescue capsule :-)

As for the flying cars - probably best that they
never worked ... there'd be flaming junk falling
from the skies almost constantly. People suck
even at 2-D driving.

(Looks like there's no such thing as anti-gravity
alas ... it'd require unbending spacetime)

As for the money-laundering stuff ... fear not ...
all the players will find work-arounds almost
overnight. Some loopholes will be PROVIDED by
those who drafted the laws and those who write
the spy software. They'll get their cut of the
action in return :-)

On 8/19/24 4:39 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> An IRS employee, who has worked at the agency for more than
>> a decade, has spoken exclusively to DailyMail
>
> Shouldn't the Daily Mail be getting hot under the collar about HMRC
> rather than the IRS?

They dig up any dirt - celebrity preferably, but
they're flexible.

On 8/19/24 4:56 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 09:39:38 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>
>>> An IRS employee, who has worked at the agency for more than a decade,
>>> has spoken exclusively to DailyMail
>>
>> Shouldn't the Daily Mail be getting hot under the collar about HMRC
>> rather than the IRS?
>
>
> "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no
> attention to the plank in your own eye?"
>
> Matthew 7:3
>
> Let's ignore Rotherham and focus on the DNC fiasco...

Can barely stand to visit THAT - the stench of vomit
and bovine offal is too much :-)

Anyway ... we seem to have drifted rather off
"computer stuff" and the politics thereof ....

Being an old guy, I do get a certain satisfaction
in hearing some of that dusty Big Iron is still
doing its job after all this time.

And it will until the very end - as said, they
can't afford or DARE to replace What Works. It'll
have to be an emergency, and the replacement junk
will be screwed for YEARS.

On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 21:34:46 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> As for the flying cars - probably best that they never worked ...
> there'd be flaming junk falling from the skies almost constantly.
> People suck even at 2-D driving.

The point being, they’re almost completely automated -- they’re cars after
all, not conventional aircraft. Possibly even no conventional controls:
just a screen, perhaps, for you to enter your destination, and leave all
the actual driving to the car itself.

The one that could really need to chaos in the skies would be personal
jetpacks. Traffic control would become impossible.

Hmm, I half-recall there was an SF short story along exactly those
lines ...

vallor wrote:
>>
>> Heh ... I remember visiting a county facility when I was still pretty
>> young. The computer room was freezing and the floor was laser-leveled
>> for the benefit of the old-style disk drive units (and I mean
>> "units", you could physically remove a big spool of about 12" wide
>> disks - DO wait until they stop spinning !). There were also the
>> boxes with the spinning tapes and the obligatory card and paper-tape
>> readers.
>>
>> The "cpu chip" was about a cubic METER in size in the middle of the
>> room - DEC I think, PDP-4 or maybe PDP-7 - full of a bunch of circuit
>> boards with zillions of individual transistors and perhaps a few
>> early "chips". Workers/programmers had serial terminals at their
>> desks.

Yeah, I remember the university had that stuff in the 1970s, and also a
"concentrator" that multiplexed 300-baud terminals into an ISDN line.