Comments on: Social Security And Compound Confusion http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/08/21/social-security-compound-confusion/ Learn, Network, Invest Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:57:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: David Clarkhttp://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/08/21/social-security-compound-confusion/#comment-93109 David Clark Wed, 23 Mar 2011 05:00:31 +0000 http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/?p=6524#comment-93109 I had no idea so much was involved just picking the numbers, but you clearly know your stuff. Of course the SSA wants nothing to do with it, it might actually take some time and effort. So how does this ever get resolved? I had no idea so much was involved just picking the numbers, but you clearly know your stuff. Of course the SSA wants nothing to do with it, it might actually take some time and effort. So how does this ever get resolved?

]]> By: Tim Hawkinshttp://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/08/21/social-security-compound-confusion/#comment-67975 Tim Hawkins Sat, 22 Aug 2009 17:04:00 +0000 http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/?p=6524#comment-67975 I didn't say they *would* fix it, I just said if they did, then this is how they *should* fix it. I'm just a lowly programmer, not a vaunted politician... I didn’t say they *would* fix it, I just said if they did, then this is how they *should* fix it. I’m just a lowly programmer, not a vaunted politician…

]]> By: Tylerhttp://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/08/21/social-security-compound-confusion/#comment-67972 Tyler Sat, 22 Aug 2009 14:42:07 +0000 http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/?p=6524#comment-67972 Interesting. You would think that they would fix something like that. Especially if any of our common wealths ever moved in to become a state in the union we would have to fix that before we could merge the records together anyway. Kind of sad to hear that they are passing the buck and not fixing the issue though.-Tyler .-= Tyler´s last blog ..Happy Hour at Portland City Grill =-. BTW I love your blog! Interesting. You would think that they would fix something like that. Especially if any of our common wealths ever moved in to become a state in the union we would have to fix that before we could merge the records together anyway. Kind of sad to hear that they are passing the buck and not fixing the issue though.

-Tyler
.-= Tyler´s last blog ..Happy Hour at Portland City Grill =-.
BTW I love your blog!

]]> By: Tim Hawkinshttp://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/08/21/social-security-compound-confusion/#comment-67940 Tim Hawkins Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:54:55 +0000 http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/?p=6524#comment-67940 Very true -- the fix would best be done at the Territories by acquiring a unique prefix like 555. They are in a fairly unique situation where the change would affect a fairly small number of people; albeit a bit drastically, but at least they are probably somewhat less tied to the "system".We "suffer" in a similar manner when an area code is changed by the NANPA (nanpa.com) in response to phone number demand. Very true — the fix would best be done at the Territories by acquiring a unique prefix like 555. They are in a fairly unique situation where the change would affect a fairly small number of people; albeit a bit drastically, but at least they are probably somewhat less tied to the “system”.

We “suffer” in a similar manner when an area code is changed by the NANPA (nanpa.com) in response to phone number demand.

]]> By: Tom Koziolhttp://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/08/21/social-security-compound-confusion/#comment-67937 Tom Koziol Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:00:18 +0000 http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/?p=6524#comment-67937 Tim,Thanks for the explanation. I wish the government programmers knew this and would take a few minutes to fix the problem. Tim,

Thanks for the explanation. I wish the government programmers knew this and would take a few minutes to fix the problem.

]]> By: Tim Hawkinshttp://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/08/21/social-security-compound-confusion/#comment-67936 Tim Hawkins Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:56:26 +0000 http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/?p=6524#comment-67936 Most programmers (or DBA's) set social security number fields up as numerics because they are ALWAYS numeric which automatically adds a feature which restricts what you can key (0-9) rather than allowing (a-z), (A-Z), (~!@#$%^&*()_+) etc...The database also has the ability to automatically overlay an edit mask on the number like "nnn-nn-nnnn" (note the added dashes) so that the programmer doesn't have to do it every time it's shown to you (we're genetically lazy).Numbers "behave" differently than character fields. Numbers by definition are right-to-left based on the decimal position; character fields are left-to-right.All numbers have a decimal position just like you learned in school. It's just that we don't tend to show them (the period symbol) if they're aren't any significant digits to the right of the decimal.The leading zeros are added to the "left" side of the number just like any other number you key into a computer; so it's no surprise that the SSN is treated the same. Imagine having to key 000000010.00 ($10.00) every time (wouldn't that be a pain?). All fields in a database need to be created to store the largest value even though you may only key one cent, all those leading zeros are in the database, but when you see them they've been edited to remove the leading-non-significant-zeros to make it easier to read.So, it's not surprising at all that the "mainland computers" or a computer located anywhere on earth (even Palau) behave in a similar fashion. It's because, if you have at least a few neurons firing, any programmer, located anywhere, will take the short-cut and allow the computer to do what it does best; do some of the work for you.If you have any questions on how computers work, let me know.A long-time reader, Tim Hawkins Scotts Valley, CA Most programmers (or DBA’s) set social security number fields up as numerics because they are ALWAYS numeric which automatically adds a feature which restricts what you can key (0-9) rather than allowing (a-z), (A-Z), (~!@#$%^&*()_+) etc…

The database also has the ability to automatically overlay an edit mask on the number like “nnn-nn-nnnn” (note the added dashes) so that the programmer doesn’t have to do it every time it’s shown to you (we’re genetically lazy).

Numbers “behave” differently than character fields. Numbers by definition are right-to-left based on the decimal position; character fields are left-to-right.

All numbers have a decimal position just like you learned in school. It’s just that we don’t tend to show them (the period symbol) if they’re aren’t any significant digits to the right of the decimal.

The leading zeros are added to the “left” side of the number just like any other number you key into a computer; so it’s no surprise that the SSN is treated the same. Imagine having to key 000000010.00 ($10.00) every time (wouldn’t that be a pain?). All fields in a database need to be created to store the largest value even though you may only key one cent, all those leading zeros are in the database, but when you see them they’ve been edited to remove the leading-non-significant-zeros to make it easier to read.

So, it’s not surprising at all that the “mainland computers” or a computer located anywhere on earth (even Palau) behave in a similar fashion. It’s because, if you have at least a few neurons firing, any programmer, located anywhere, will take the short-cut and allow the computer to do what it does best; do some of the work for you.

If you have any questions on how computers work, let me know.

A long-time reader,
Tim Hawkins
Scotts Valley, CA

]]>