News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ditching Excel for Python in a legacy industry by shnock on Wednesday December 30, 2020 @07:52PM (#25588267)
Why does building and rolling out a standardized environment cost so much? Could you break down the requisite steps and resources required to achieve this?

Thank you, I appreciate it :)

Re:Ditching Excel for Python in a legacy industry by yold__ on Wednesday December 30, 2020 @08:08PM (#25588377)
Up-front costs (mostly salaries, but all I.T. projects are "billable") 1.) Getting buy-in from solutions architect, software architecture, information security, I.T. management. This will be a 6 month process. 2.) Getting buy-in from actuarial management and audit. Another 6 month process.

Recurring annual costs (over 10 years) 3.) Contractor at $150 an hour = $300K annually 4.) Contractor PM at $50 an hour = $100K annually 5.) Information security compliance hoops, getting it to play nicely with the myriad of endpoint security tools, etc 6.) Ongoing maintenance and support (failed rollouts and upgrades, user desktop support, user training)

Re:Ditching Excel for Python in a legacy industry by tomnipotent on Thursday December 31, 2020 @01:49AM (#25590228)
This isn't realistic at all. Assuming actuaries know Python like they know Excel, the only other added cost is someone technical to slap together a working environment, which isn't particularly hard when compared to the state of what Excel offers in a collaborative environment.

You just don't jump from "humans in Excel" to "CI/CD perfected pipeline" overnight, nor do you need it.

Excel shops still have costly expenses rewriting entire workflows/re-doing Excel files constantly as people come and go, it's not like there isn't already maintenance cost with the current method.

Re:Ditching Excel for Python in a legacy industry by buryat on Thursday December 31, 2020 @01:54AM (#25590258)
reminds me of standardization of the shipping container, not sure of all the details of how that push had happened though