Have fun keeping this up to date. It's an admirable idea, but the tax forms and rules change significantly every year. I built a payroll system for a suite of small and medium sized businesses back in the day. Even during a stable administration the rules are impossible to keep up with. We had a team of engineers who every year had to spend weeks to months trying to keep it up to date and verify the numbers. It's why my accountant makes $400/hr and why there are no open source projects that have ever taken hold in the market.
> Most tax software derives trust from the party who maintains it (e.g. Intuit, the IRS, etc.)
It's also something that can be made more achievable by pruning coverage to the most common tax situations. E.g. my target coverage for this project is 80% of federal filers, individuals only. This is a lot more achievable than achieving coverage for all individuals plus businesses, etc.
I did a similar project just for myself recently, and I think AI interpretation of the IRS is probably one of the ideal projects. AI is generally pretty good at following a spec, and the IRS is generally pretty good at writing detailed specs.
In my case, I had an Inherited IRA that, and this is the first year I have to take a distribution from it. It needs to be emptied in 10 years and starting this year I have a minimum amount to take out based on my age. My goal was to write a simulation of how much I take out each year, what that does to my income taxes, how much tax deferred growth I get by leaving it, etc. I have an optimizer to connect to the simulation, so I could then figure out how much I should take each year.
I decided to vibe it, just for fun. I started very simply: write me a simulation for each year with this much projected growth, etc. The AI asked me some questions like "do you have kids going to college during this time frame?" and did you know that your state has an allowance for this much tax free withdrawal, etc. That took me down a rabbit hole since I didn't know all of those things. I said, go read the IRS code and my state tax code, figure out all of the things that are relevant for my finances (normal W-2 employee, no fancy stuff), and it wrote me a much more detailed simulation than I would have thought of and tied it all to all of the tax things that might be relevant for me.
I was shocked at how good of a job it did, I can (and did) independently verify it since my taxes aren't that complicated. It did find savings that I didn't know were available to me.
I think that this is a great area for AI-based development since it's essentially transpiling detailed IRS specs into code, and that's what AI is really good at.
Why? These rules are written down somewhere. Looks like the spec was created by pointing the model at irs.gov and/or the Federal Register itself and telling it something like, "Create a specification for a verifiable tax model and the tools to verify it."
Next year, all the maintainer has to do is issue the same prompt, no?
Tax software exists because a select set of politicians want you to hate doing taxes. It's complexity is intentional, and baked in with the business of selling software to "make it easier".
America is a fat sloth of an economy and generates value by doing nothing and letting capitalists then own the shit out come.
Had a developer who worked for me who did something very similar. Lived all over the world, would get short term visas, and return to Mexico if needed to await his next visa. He had a friend that let him use his mailing address for work and mail and slept on his couch or in hostels while awaiting a new visa. He loved the life. Lived on a dozen different beaches while he was working for me. Apparently a Mexican visa is one of the easiest to get.
I'm confused. Where does this article say anything about starting from scratch? Is there a chunk of the story missing? It jumps straight from talking about PLATO Notes to referring to Lotus Notes. There is a "spoiler alert" in there about IBM acquiring Lotus for Notes, but it doesn't spoil anything in this story. Did IBM try to rewrite it from scratch or something? What's happening?
Author here, the idea with the title was that Lotus Notes was built at a time when the standards for email especially but also interfaces and keyboard shortcuts were still in flux, and it was built for so many platforms at the same time, all of which contributed to many of the complaints about its interface seeming like a mess. It was starting from scratch with opinionated takes about how the software should work, and that’s a tough spot to build in (and which partly accounts for both the fond and bad memories that both typically surface whenever Lotus Notes is mentioned).
This. Any engineer or manager developing Notes at the time had to be aware of X.400 and X.500, and SMTP. They decided to ignore them. However cool and useful and clumsy Notes was, it was a proprietary walled garden. Lotus and the IBM hawked it, and surely profited. But for the customer it was an expense. Eventually Notes was overtaken by Metcalf’s Law, and the fact that cheaper always wins.
Sure, but Notes was built for a world where ccMail, MS Mail, and GroupWise were the main workgroup email systems.
Notes followed a similar pattern, with a proprietary "post office" system with optional gateways to larger x.400 / SMTP / UUCP / OfficeVision networks for those who needed them.
Going SMTP (or even x.400)-native from the start might have been a better choice in the long run, but that's only clear in retrospect - it certainly wasn't obvious at the time.
Yeah, Exchange is a good comparator because it shows what the mail aspect of Notes might have been like had it been designed in the mid 90s rather than the late 80s.
It's hard now to appreciate how different corporate IT was from the free-wheeling Internet world. The unexpected popularity of the web really did change everything.
in 1990 the internet was something talked about on your BBS as a mystical place you couldn't get access to except as a student. Lots of places had email, but it was unusual for anyone to be connected to any other system. Sometimes a BBS was part of fidonet, but that was rare (and there were many many less known networks).
Even if your typical big company did have a gateway for their internal email to other companies, odds are very few people used that gateway for business. If you wanted to communicate with somebody in a different company you dialed the phone or sent a fax.
On the other hand, anyone working on Notes would also be aware that its relationship with email is closer to today's Sharepoint than to today's Exchange. Email was one small aspect of a massive featureset; Notes was ahead of its time in terms of CRM/ERP/one-platform-for-everything that drives modern businesses like Oracle and Salesforce.
The Notes directory was based on X.500 - it had the same attributes etc. Notes didn't implement DAP, but then almost nobody did, which is why we got LDAP.
There was an add-on connector for X.400 mail. I remember installing it a couple of times. It was fine, if cumbersome due to the nature of X.400. ;-)
They also didn't ignore SMTP. There was a connector for it for Notes 4.0 and 4.1, and starting with Notes 4.5 that connector was bundled in the box. Starting with Release 5 they retired the connector and moved SMTP functionality to be native in the mail router process, and for security they provided a separate SMTP listener task. Both of these were configured in the Notes Directory via Server Documents and Configuration Documents, just like any other feature of the server. If a Domino server wasn't sending or receiving SMTP, it's because its administrator didn't want it to, not because it couldn't.
It wasn't a walled garden, or if it was the wall was very low. By comparison Microsoft's first attempt to dethrone Notes - Exchange Public Folders - was a completely walled garden. And a very well fertilised one which people avoided due to the smell.
But it's OK, Microsoft then gave us SharePoint. The fact that Microsoft's customers rushed to it tells you how bad Public Folders were. So your comment "That and, you know, Microsoft" is much closer to the truth than protocol support.
(Source: I was a Principle Certified Lotus Domino Administrator for multiple versions, and have used & administered Lotus Notes versions from version 3.33 through to 8.5. I worked at a consultancy and installed many, many implementations of Lotus Notes across a number of topologies. I also had an Exchange Server MCP and worked with multiple versions of that too.)
Usually, when someone talks about "starting from scratch" they mean "starting over from scratch," meaning throwing out something good enough in the hope of building something perfect.
This article is more about "first mover disadvantage" or "handicap of a head start" where an early implementation is leapfrogged by competitors that don't have legacy baggage.
I think they basically did (at one point, horrifyingly, there was a lotus notes based on Eclipse of all things), but yeah, article doesn’t mention it as far as I can see. Maybe they hit publish too early…
Always fun when NLNOTES crashed but the Eclipse wrapper kept running so things like tabs still worked but couldn't show any Notes tabs however web based tabs kept working.
The sad thing for me is that Notes’ core data model was really solid. As a rapid internal app dev platform it was ahead of its time in many ways. E.g. Microsoft’s sharepoint and power apps still cannot compete in terms of capabilities. IBM just didn’t know what to do with it.
>Did IBM try to rewrite it from scratch or something?
In a way yes, IBM wanted notes to be an email clone. IBM took cc mail (I think) and shoehorned it into Lotus notes.
To me, that ruined Notes. If I get the versions numbers right, version 3 was great, IBM/Lotus came out with v4, which to me was a bit worse, and each new version was worse than the prior. Instead of focusing on emails, IBM should have focused on making notes servers easy to install and maintain and keep the application portion relevant.
By worse, it was the application portion that degraded. If you saw how cool the applications were with v3, you would wonder why Notes never became a "thing". Even third parties were creating applications for Notes at the time, some were very good. But to me IBM ruined that business by focusing on only Email part of Notes. Now AFAIK, there are no 3rd party applications for notes.
Maybe the company that bought notes from IBM is trying to get back to the roots, but I kind of doubt it.
The IBM Lotus Notes mail client and cc:Mail were developed independently by separate teams in different locations. Both were originally built by independent companies that were later acquired. cc:Mail was killed in 2000. IBM might have added some Notes features to achieve functional parity with cc:Mail and make it easier for customers to migrate.
I had the same reaction. I was particularly interested in "the dangers of starting from scratch" and it just turned out to be a history of lotus notes. I stopped reading about 80% of the way through, so perhaps they addressed that towards the end - but the title should have been different then.
> Most tax software derives trust from the party who maintains it (e.g. Intuit, the IRS, etc.)
Because they have the resources to keep it up to date. And even they get it wrong sometimes. Including the IRS itself: https://www.irs.gov/e-file-providers/known-issues-and-soluti...