Interestingly that would put some UK banks as running code that was written when the currency was still Pounds, Shillings and Pence.

In the past I've heard that some banks put a decimalisation layer on top of their existing business logic, that would translate between the old Pounds, Shillings and Pence currency, and the new decimal currency. I wonder if there are any banks out there which still have Pounds, Shillings and Pence at the heart of the computer systems.

For the basic processes, why wouldn’t they? It’s not like adding an amount of money to an account while simultaneously subtracting the same amount from another account has gotten out of vogue or that the algorithms to do so have changed.

FTA: “the reason it lasted is because it was very simple and it worked properly and it was high volume, simple transactions,” he added. “The banks are moving away from these systems because the people who understand them are leaving, and no young professionals want to learn languages like Cobol.””

I guess young professionals do not want to write software that is very simple and works properly (/s, but only partially)

> It found that 50% of banks admitted to relying on software that only one or two staff members, who are at or near retirement age, understand.

This is an organizational problem or just plain neglect. I learned cobol back in the seventies in one day. I used it for 40 years and I never had any problems understanding programs written by others.

I wonder if the use of LLMs will extend the lifespan of this software. Instead of hiring a niche programmer, they can now offload the syntax and nuances of COBOL to the AI while being supervised by experienced developers.

Granted, perhaps banking isn’t the ideal place to experiment with this type of technology, but it does seem like a promising use case.