DOGE v Social Security Fraud*

[superrific]

It is reporting these things because SS's backend is written in a programming language that doesn't have a date field.
Because COBOL does not have a date type, some implementations rely instead on a system whereby all dates are coded to a reference point. The most commonly used is May 20, 1875, as this was the date of an international standards-setting conference held in Paris, known as the Convention du Mètre.

No, 150-Year-Olds Aren’t Collecting Social Security Benefits

Elon Musk claims to have found rampant fraud in the Social Security Administration. There’s a much simpler explanation.

www.wired.com

C also does not have a date field. Python does not have a date field natively. Programming languages that do have date fields implement them in the same way: as integers that get converted to a different visual representation by the code.

Recording dates and times as the number of days/hours/seconds/milliseconds after some recognized reference time is the most efficient way of doing it. By far.

 

[ZenMode]

But seriously. It has been explained. Then you just repeated the same nonsense claim. Here's an idea: stop talking shit you know nothing about.

I won't apologize for calling out and correcting ignorance, misinformation and/or untruth. In fact, I'm quite proud of my ability to contribute to our collective understanding of the world around us. I don't play favorites: hell, sometimes I even have to correct myself because I make mistakes.

Anyway, regardless of my style, does the explanation make sense to you?

 

[Healing]

It’s repeatedly remarkable, though concurrently banal, the arrogance of ignorance.

 

[Enigma94]

We've gone from recreational contrarianism to pedantic contrarianism. Everyone knows what Trump and Elon are saying, but the pedantic contrarian must parse it out to the point of gaslighting.

 

[superrific]

When someone teaches me something, I'm appreciative. It makes me more knowledgeable. I don't tell them to fuck off. In what might just be a coincidence, but might not be, I know lots of things. More than the average poster, that's for sure.

There's no shame in learning from a professional, or somebody highly knowledgeable for other reasons. I've learned a lot about Central America over the years from CRHeel. I don't take anything he says as gospel truth (unless it's about his own life), and he doesn't present it as such. But I know more than I did and more than I would without conversations with him. At no point does it make me feel insecure.

 

[Callatoroy]

When someone teaches me something, I'm appreciative. It makes me more knowledgeable. I don't tell them to fuck off. In what might just be a coincidence, but might not be, I know lots of things. More than the average poster, that's for sure.

There's no shame in learning from a professional, or somebody highly knowledgeable for other reasons. I've learned a lot about Central America over the years from CRHeel. I don't take anything he says as gospel truth (unless it's about his own life), and he doesn't present it as such. But I know more than I did and more than I would without conversations with him. At no point does it make me feel insecure.

What can you teach me about pizza dough?

 

[kickazzz2000]

Again, what Trump or Elon said is beside the point. There is something wrong with their system regardless of whether or not every person is correctly being paid.

If my employer had a flaw in their backend system, that showed an extra zero at the end of each payroll payment ($4000 showed as $40000), but each person got paid the correct ($4000) amount, that would not negate the clear issue with the system/data/reporting.

When your system shows you paying money to tens of millions of dead people, that is, in itself, an issue.

Oh for fucks sake

 

[ZenMode]

When someone teaches me something, I'm appreciative. It makes me more knowledgeable. I don't tell them to fuck off. In what might just be a coincidence, but might not be, I know lots of things. More than the average poster, that's for sure.

There's no shame in learning from a professional, or somebody highly knowledgeable for other reasons. I've learned a lot about Central America over the years from CRHeel. I don't take anything he says as gospel truth (unless it's about his own life), and he doesn't present it as such. But I know more than I did and more than I would without conversations with him. At no point does it make me feel insecure.

To clarify, my response was related to your approach and nothing more. It's easy for the person being a prick to say "regardless of my approach", and for some people that might work. I am generally not one of those people. However, while I almost entirely ignore finesse for being a prick, I continue to engage with you because you do sometimes provide valuable information and, most importantly, you've mentioned that there are extenuating circumstances that contribute to you sometimes being a condescending ass.

 

[CeruleanBlueHeel]

C also does not have a date field. Python does not have a date field natively. Programming languages that do have date fields implement them in the same way: as integers that get converted to a different visual representation by the code.

Recording dates and times as the number of days/hours/seconds/milliseconds after some recognized reference time is the most efficient way of doing it. By far.

Exactly. It's nothing more than legacy data within a legacy system with some data fields defaulting to value when no value is present. I'm an ex-programmer and database guy and I see this kind of thing all the effing time. To jump to a conclusion that this constitutes payments being disbursed to non-existent living people is beyond ludicrous and sensationalizing data that is less than pristine.

 

[superrific]

To clarify, my response was related to your approach and nothing more. It's easy for the person being a prick to say "regardless of my approach", and for some people that might work. I am generally not one of those people. However, while I almost entirely ignore finesse for being a prick, I continue to engage with you because you do sometimes provide valuable information and, most importantly, you've mentioned that there are extenuating circumstances that contribute to you sometimes being a condescending ass.

1. How would you characterize your own conduct? Are you perfectly noble here? Or maybe people see you as a bit of a prick, due to your insistence on staking out strong opinions based on nothing at all? And then clinging to them and moving the goalposts when people try to explain it to you?

I wouldn't have to say things like "do I have to explain it more simply" if you would make an effort to get it the first time. Or maybe you do get it, but you won't acknowledge it in your posts.

2. Personally, I just can't understand your mentality. I would be mortally embarrassed to talk out of my ass on a regular basis. I have, on very rare occasions, spoken with confidence outside my area of knowledge. It embarrasses me, and I quickly retract and correct. It's not about being called out. It's about my own personal integrity. It's about being able to walk with my head high. I don't know -- maybe that's just me. I'm just saying that I completely fail to comprehend your motivations or style.

3. I admit that I'm fighting a bit of a proxy war on this board. You are not the problem the country faces. It's the millions of people who think and act like you that are the problem. It's how we get such an obvious idiot blowhard confabulist as the leader of the free world. Well, not any more. The US president is no longer a leader. But of course I can't do anything about the millions. I can only address what is in front of me.

Yes, I am considerably more frustrated with the bullshit when our president is destroying the government because he and his supporters believe in mounds and mounds of manure. That's why I fight over databases. It's not really important -- but for that same reason, why do you pick a fight about them? If people don't stand up to the bullshit -- and I address you as bullshit consumer (who should stand up) and producer (to whom we should stand up) -- then we get a government run by bullshit. It's a very bad development.

 

[ZenMode]

1. How would you characterize your own conduct? Are you perfectly noble here? Or maybe people see you as a bit of a prick, due to your insistence on staking out strong opinions based on nothing at all? And then clinging to them and moving the goalposts when people try to explain it to you?

Regardless of anything else, I leave personal attacks out of the equation unless someone personally attacks me.

I wouldn't have to say things like "do I have to explain it more simply" if you would make an effort to get it the first time. Or maybe you do get it, but you won't acknowledge it in your posts.

Stating what is technically correct doesn't always a) apply to the discussion or b) change an opinion. For example, my opinion is that there is something wrong with the SS system since it's reporting that people who can't possibly be alive are receiving benefits. You wrote a very long, and probably technically correct, post about programming languages..... a post that, despite likely being technically accurate, changed nothing as far as the reality of the SS system because the system is STILL reporting that millions of people, way past any medically possible age, are receiving benefits.

2. Personally, I just can't understand your mentality. I would be mortally embarrassed to talk out of my ass on a regular basis. I have, on very rare occasions, spoken with confidence outside my area of knowledge. It embarrasses me, and I quickly retract and correct. It's not about being called out. It's about my own personal integrity. It's about being able to walk with my head high. I don't know -- maybe that's just me. I'm just saying that I completely fail to comprehend your motivations or style.

I don't know what you want me to say. The SS database is reporting things that are impossible by today's medical standards. Do you want me to ignore that because you know more about programming languages than I do?

3. I admit that I'm fighting a bit of a proxy war on this board. You are not the problem the country faces. It's the millions of people who think and act like you that are the problem. It's how we get such an obvious idiot blowhard confabulist as the leader of the free world. Well, not any more. The US president is no longer a leader. But of course I can't do anything about the millions. I can only address what is in front of me.

Yes, I am considerably more frustrated with the bullshit when our president is destroying the government because he and his supporters believe in mounds and mounds of manure. That's why I fight over databases. It's not really important -- but for that same reason, why do you pick a fight about them? If people don't stand up to the bullshit -- and I address you as bullshit consumer (who should stand up) and producer (to whom we should stand up) -- then we get a government run by bullshit. It's a very bad development.

The issue that people have with me is that I don't neatly align with either political party's views and I don't share in the panic that seems to consume both the right and left. I can't make myself feel panicked because Trump is president any more than a Democrat can make themselves not feel panicked because Trump is president.

 

[ChileG]

ZenMode - what do you mean the database is “reporting” that dead people are receiving benefits.

Can you explain what you mean by “reporting?”

 

[superrific]

Regardless of anything else, I leave personal attacks out of the equation unless someone personally attacks me.

Stating what is technically correct doesn't always a) apply to the discussion or b) change an opinion. For example, my opinion is that there is something wrong with the SS system since it's reporting that people who can't possibly be alive are receiving benefits. You wrote a very long, and probably technically correct, post about programming languages..... a post that, despite likely being technically accurate, changed nothing as far as the reality of the SS system because the system is STILL reporting that millions of people, way past any medically possible age, are receiving benefits.

I don't know what you want me to say. The SS database is reporting things that are impossible by today's medical standards. Do you want me to ignore that because you know more about programming languages than I do?

The issue that people have with me is that I don't neatly align with either political party's views and I don't share in the panic that seems to consume both the right and left. I can't make myself feel panicked because Trump is president any more than a Democrat can make themselves not feel panicked because Trump is president.

1. The SS database is not in fact "reporting" any such thing. In fact, databases don't "report" anything. They store data. In your word processing program, there's a database of all valid English words, which is what it uses to spell check. The database is just the list of words. The spell checker uses that data, according to its own programming, to do its job.

That's why not using a database column is immaterial. If there's a database column full of junk, don't use it. There's no law that says it has to be used. And that's the right approach -- or at least the approach used virtually all of the time in industry -- because correcting the data is incredibly time consuming for no benefit.

2. So this is a great example of what I'm talking about. You're saying that what I wrote changes nothing about the reality . . . but you say that only because you don't understand the actual reality. You think the database does things that it does not do. If there are benefits being paid to dead people (there aren't), you don't fix that in the database. You fix it in the program you wrote that pulls data and makes decisions.

I'm obviously way more knowledgeable about this topic than you are, and I'm not a silly person. So if I write a long post explaining the situation, maybe you could ask yourself the following question: "if what super wrote is irrelevant, why would he write it? " And the answer should be, "hmm, maybe I'm not understanding what is and isn't relevant. Maybe I should ask some questions." When you say "what you wrote doesn't matter" you're insulting me. You're telling me that I can't even figure out the relevant principles, which is infuriating when the problem is that you don't know enough to understand the basics.

3. The issue that people have with you has nothing to do with your political alignment. Well, that's not my issue with you at least. My issue is that you form and then express opinions that have no basis in reality, because you don't understand how that reality works. That's not true of you 100% of the time, but it's true an alarmingly high percentage.

So you start taking positions -- right, left, center, contrary, whatever -- that are fundamentally incorrect, and you don't even know enough to see why or how they are incorrect. Too You don't advance conversations. You're not a knowledge source; you're a knowledge sink, except you don't even absorb the knowledge being imparted to you.

Imagine you're watching a football game with someone who really doesn't know much about the sport at all. S/he says, "why are the coaches so stupid? They should put all the linemen out to the side, snap the ball, throw it out to a WR and let the line block for the receiver on the outside." You say, it doesn't work like that. And your friend insists that it would be a great idea because it makes sense to them. Then you explain legal and illegal formations, and it makes no difference. You explain that the QB would be under immediate pressure, and the pass to the WR can be easily intercepted by a DB at the line of scrimmage sprinting into the backfield. And yet the person continues to insist that there's a good idea in there.

Wouldn't you find that incredibly frustrating?

 

[ZenMode]

1. The SS database is not in fact "reporting" any such thing. In fact, databases don't "report" anything. They store data. In your word processing program, there's a database of all valid English words, which is what it uses to spell check. The database is just the list of words. The spell checker uses that data, according to its own programming, to do its job.

That's why not using a database column is immaterial. If there's a database column full of junk, don't use it. There's no law that says it has to be used. And that's the right approach -- or at least the approach used virtually all of the time in industry -- because correcting the data is incredibly time consuming for no benefit.

Reporting, like the type provided by Elon, very, very, very likely isn't compiled manually on in an Excel spreadsheet. It would take an army of people weeks to manually count people in each age group. It IS based on a query that generates a report. That query is run against a database.

2. So this is a great example of what I'm talking about. You're saying that what I wrote changes nothing about the reality . . . but you say that only because you don't understand the actual reality. You think the database does things that it does not do. If there are benefits being paid to dead people (there aren't), you don't fix that in the database. You fix it in the program you wrote that pulls data and makes decisions.

That is untrue. I have created and managed Access and mySQL databases. I have created the queries that generate the reports that look just like the table that Elon posted. Again, there is no chance that someone is manually counting each person in a specific age range and hand-typing it into a spreadsheet.

I'm obviously way more knowledgeable about this topic than you are, and I'm not a silly person. So if I write a long post explaining the situation, maybe you could ask yourself the following question: "if what super wrote is irrelevant, why would he write it? " And the answer should be, "hmm, maybe I'm not understanding what is and isn't relevant. Maybe I should ask some questions." When you say "what you wrote doesn't matter" you're insulting me. You're telling me that I can't even figure out the relevant principles, which is infuriating when the problem is that you don't know enough to understand the basics.

Maybe indeed.

3. The issue that people have with you has nothing to do with your political alignment. Well, that's not my issue with you at least. My issue is that you form and then express opinions that have no basis in reality, because you don't understand how that reality works. That's not true of you 100% of the time, but it's true an alarmingly high percentage.

So you start taking positions -- right, left, center, contrary, whatever -- that are fundamentally incorrect, and you don't even know enough to see why or how they are incorrect. Too You don't advance conversations. You're not a knowledge source; you're a knowledge sink, except you don't even absorb the knowledge being imparted to you.

I would like you to point out the next position I take that is "fundamentally incorrect" and tell me what is objectively incorrect.

Imagine you're watching a football game with someone who really doesn't know much about the sport at all. S/he says, "why are the coaches so stupid? They should put all the linemen out to the side, snap the ball, throw it out to a WR and let the line block for the receiver on the outside." You say, it doesn't work like that. And your friend insists that it would be a great idea because it makes sense to them. Then you explain legal and illegal formations, and it makes no difference. You explain that the QB would be under immediate pressure, and the pass to the WR can be easily intercepted by a DB at the line of scrimmage sprinting into the backfield. And yet the person continues to insist that there's a good idea in there.

Wouldn't you find that incredibly frustrating?

Or imagine watching a game with someone who, while you are disputing ball positioning for a first down, is talking about the type of seed used for the grass that the ball is placed on and believing it should change your view on the first down.

 

[finesse]

Or imagine watching a game with someone who, while you are disputing ball positioning for a first down, is talking about the type of seed used for the grass that the ball is placed on and believing it should change your view on the first down.

It's a damned shame that this isn't introspection.

 

[Callatoroy]

Reporting, like the type provided by Elon, very, very, very likely isn't compiled manually on in an Excel spreadsheet. It would take an army of people weeks to manually count people in each age group. It IS based on a query that generates a report. That query is run against a database.

That is untrue. I have created and managed Access and mySQL databases. I have created the queries that generate the reports that look just like the table that Elon posted. Again, there is no chance that someone is manually counting each person in a specific age range and hand-typing it into a spreadsheet.

Maybe indeed.

I would like you to point out the next position I take that is "fundamentally incorrect" and tell me what is objectively incorrect.

Or imagine watching a game with someone who, while you are disputing ball positioning for a first down, is talking about the type of seed used for the grass that the ball is placed on and believing it should change your view on the first down.

Super is diagramming football plays to illustrate a point and he doesn't even understand the strategy in using time outs in basketball. Crazy world.