[akira2501]

> Let me guess, you also think public servants are lazy, overpaid and unskilled?

Do you not see this article as evidence of this fact? If you walked into any other business reliant on "floppy disks" just to take your money, would you praise their practices and efficiency?

> Comments like this belie how many people form opinions of public agencies without having any real experience with government.

I form opinions because I try to use their services and am disappointed and often disgusted. Do you really think "experience with public transport" is particularly hard to come by? That this is all too esoteric for the "common man" to opine on? Please...

> transit employees largely do the best they can with the resources and constraints they are given

Perhaps they should earn those resources competitively instead of being given them? Otherwise, this seems like a perennial chicken and the egg problem that swallows tax dollars with no worthwhile result.

[arrosenberg]

I don't think the article is a reflection on efficacy of the public agency. If their budget for new software is $0, how exactly are they supposed to upgrade it? It's certainly possible that the agency has been utter shit for 25 years, but this article doesn't give the information to conclude that.

> Perhaps they should earn those resources competitively instead of being given them?

How? They're a public agency. There is no profit motive - if the public wants nicer stuff, they need to pay for it. That includes both the software costs and the higher salary costs to hire people capable of those types of projects.

Again, you come off as someone running their mouth with no actual experience interacting with public agencies. It's very frustrating to know how to fix a problem without being given the resources or permission to do so, which is often the case in transit. Add to that most transit agencies have a tiny budget for IT, and I'm not sure how you expect this to get solved without a big public push.