COBOL doesn’t have a date type. And there were “people” in that “list” that weren’t just 150 years old, and they varied in ages.
The real answer is that the list that they’re saying is people getting social security, isn’t the list of people getting paid, just lists of random ages in the database, which ultimately means nothing.
The response is wrong. I remember reading an article that disproved it and explained the actual reason. However I forgot the actual reason.
COBOL doesn’t have a date type. And there were “people” in that “list” that weren’t just 150 years old, and they varied in ages.
The real answer is that the list that they’re saying is people getting social security, isn’t the list of people getting paid, just lists of random ages in the database, which ultimately means nothing.
yeah I think they did a report on if it was worth updating the ages and found that there was no point. It would have been a waste of money.