Leaving Cert Results

The kind of thing that EVEN an audit would have caught

I don’t understand how if it’s one line of code it would only affect 6,500 students.

These students had their worst 2 subjects at Junior Cert selected instead of their best two subjects. Why did it only do that for some students but not all?

Look, they bottled the Leaving Cert like they bottled everything else. Now Norma Foley is jamming the kids and teachers in there and not even letting them get tested. Can you imagine how all this will be seen in 20 years time? What historians will say?

1 Like

You could change thousands of students lives with one character, let alone, one line.
Replace a < for a > and the whole logic of an algorithm can flip. Without the details it could effect any subset of the total students big or small.

They talked about 2 bugs. 1 was a the “2 best junior cert subjects” thing.
What’s the second? Including Civics?

1 Like

It’s effectively asking the public to believe that for 60,000 students their best two grades were equal to or worse than their worst two grades.

1 Like

Ok Harry. I’ve always thought you were a cunt.

3 Likes

Yep the second bug was including the subject CPDE (I think that’s the right name) when it should have been excluded.

Either the developers writing the code read the requirements wrong or else the requirements were wrong when the requirements gathering was being done. Did the department provide the signed off requirements to the company and they were wrong there or did the company do the requirements gathering and got them wrong and the department didn’t catch it and signed off on it?

Given the sensitivity they should have been 150% sure of the accuracy before releasing.

mind boggling. Given the hasty development of such a sensitive project, 160K is ridiculously low. Alarm bells straight away there.

Before you release anything, you give money to an independent body to go in and forensically review the solution. They’ve looked to cheap out and have been absolutely stung. Joke shop stuff

1 Like

Going to cost 10 x times more now.

As the saying goes “ buy Cheap buy Twice “.

3 Likes

My take-away here is that, if I ever have twins (identical or otherwise), I need to either send them to different schools or make one of them do transition year to guard against algorithm issues in the predictive grading process in the event of there being a pandemic during Leaving Cert year. The government is getting heat here but this is a basic future proofing failure on the parents’ part.

2 Likes

I’d go for the one with the biggest tits.

:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:
“What’s a big challenge you’ve overcome”
“I threw travellers out of a bar”
“It doesn’t come much bigger than that”

The clever one, or the thick one?

2 Likes

Albeit sounds like the customer was billed more like how it was supported in this case.

3 Likes

It’s the little things.

Eamon Ryan repeatedly calling this debacle a “variation” in Leader’s Questions there.

The variation was noticed. The variation was followed up on. Nobody was kept in the dark about this variation.

:joy:

A to the motherfuckin K homeboy. A to the motherfucking K. Actually holding the government to account.

1 Like

3 errors now.

:eek: :smile:

He is some piece of work to be fair, nailing the fuckers weekly.

Good choice