To the Editor:
Ten years ago, IBM’s Watson computer was the winner on the Jeopardy! TV show, as described by Eric J. Savitz in “IBM’s Reboot” (Cover Story, Nov. 26). While I agree that the computer indeed was the winner, Watson, like the other two contestants, knew the answers. The only way to win the game was to buzz in first, and Watson had that down pat.
As Savitz correctly states, Watson was supposed to “improve medical research and diagnostics”; unfortunately, the “answers” were not available. In subsequent research, Watson did not perform up to expectations. Oncology tests and treatment proved to be less successful than anticipated.
One last observation, regarding the quantum metaphor (“Quantum Computing Remains Mostly Promise, but Maybe Not for Long. How to Play It,” Nov. 26): Eventually the coin has to “land,” and that’s when the unknown answer has to be revealed, and unfortunately Watson did not “buzz in with the correct answer.”
Ira Gross, Boca Raton, Fla.
To the Editor:
While this won’t be Microsoft from 2013, IBM has a chance to right the ship. With the way the market has behaved and many companies pulling earnings forward because of Covid-19, I think that IBM has a better-than-average shot to return 50%-plus in two years on multiple expansion and single-digit growth. If the price goes down, I’ll buy more.
Terrence Favero, On Barrons.com
Pension Problem
To the Editor:
The Q&A with Teresa Ghilarducci was enjoyable to read (“America’s Retirement System Is Broken. How to Fix It,” Interview, Nov. 25). Though an economist, she talked in normal language and not in the typical language and terminology of the dismal science. The basic takeaway from the article is that most Americans, for a variety of reasons, do not save money throughout their lives and enter retirement deep in debt. I agree with her that the system needs to be changed to favor employees by assisting and incentivizing them to save money. We just need the willpower of corporations and politicians to get involved.
Ted Fisk, Naperville, Ill.
To the Editor:
Ghilarducci laments the loss of the defined-benefit pension. I say good riddance—they were a good deal only for those fortunate enough to stay at the same employer for 30 years. I am an electrical engineer in the volatile and dynamic semiconductor industry. In my 37-year career, I have had eight employers (four of which no longer exist as businesses). I owe my retirement security to pension portability. Another term for pension portability is 401(k).
Shane Millburn, Colorado Spring, Colo.
To the Editor:
Ghilarducci’s observation that retirement plans, including Social Security, are in trouble is correct. However, her proposed solution is a mathematical impossibility because her diagnosis of the cause is wrong. The problem that pension plans face is not underfunding, though that contributes, but instead the ongoing increase in longevity. Life expectancy was 47 years in 1900, 60 years a century ago, and 78 years by 2018. This increase will not stop. The main causes of death are heart disease, stroke, cancer, and trauma. The trajectory for all four is upward, with no sign of slowing. In 1950, there were 16.5 workers for every Social Security retiree. By 2020, that number was 2.8. The only possible solution to the pension problem is to extend working years. As a proof of principle, I am still working at age 88.
Dr. Claude Burdick, Livermore, Calif.
Interest Rates
To the Editor:
In Lisa Beilfuss’ Nov. 26 Economy column, “Will Interest Rates Go Up in 2022? Don’t Bet on It,” David Rosenberg makes a strong case for why there will be zero rate increases next year and beyond. Because this can devastate seniors trying to live on secure fixed income, there should be no IRA required minimum distributions as long as interest rates stay below a given value.
Ron Minarik, Mystic, Conn.
To the Editor:
In 1986, PaineWebber put me into its stockbroker training program. An older broker said that Barron’s would be required reading. He has been right for many years. Now retired, I have time to read all of the writers each week. Lately, Lisa Beilfuss’ articles on interest rates, inflation, and consumer sentiment started ringing a sell bell for me. Thank you, Lisa.
Dave Wende, Fort Worth, Texas
Enron’s Lessons
To the Editor:
As an ex-Enron executive, I wholeheartedly agree with Michael W. Peregrine’s assertion that the lessons of Enron still matter (“Why Enron Still Matters 20 Years Later,” Other Voices, Nov. 24). However, he has the lesson all wrong. The lesson that everyone learned (and Peregrine alluded to) was that Enron was a bad company with a bad strategy run by bad people who did bad things. The truth is much more nuanced and little understood. That lack of understanding lulled managements and boards into thinking that they run little “Enron risk.”
Absent government bailouts and a decade of repressed interest rates, which have cost taxpayers and savers trillions, my guess is that Enron would be considered the canary in the coal mine as opposed to the poster child for corporate malfeasance.
Those who fail to learn the (actual) lessons of the past are destined to repeat them. Stakeholders beware—that object in the mirror may be much closer than it appears.
Ted Murphy, Edgartown, Mass.
Send letters to: mail@barrons.com. To be considered for publication, correspondence must bear the writer’s name, address, and phone number. Letters are subject to editing.
"right" - Google News
December 04, 2021 at 07:20AM
https://ift.tt/3pIxEMP
IBM’s Good Chance to Right the Ship - Barron's
"right" - Google News
https://ift.tt/32Okh02
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "IBM’s Good Chance to Right the Ship - Barron's"
Post a Comment