I’m sorry you guys are still dealing with this. I’ve got some really good clients that pay me day 1 that haven’t paid yet. I know the deal. But the big corporations may not. Hopefully it gets fixed sooner than later. What an embarrassment and mistake on their part.

---

Man, reporters ask some dumb questions.  Asking why the CEO wasn't around 'to help' for an IT installation is pretty dumb.  I can't think of a CEO that I've ever been associated with that would know jack [BLEEP] about installing software.  

I'd love to know what the REAL issue was/is.  They should have been able to just back out of the change and go back to the old system until they figured out the issue.  That is just extremely poor planning.

If you want to guarantee that a system upgrade will be FUBARed, make sure that you invite your CEO to participate.  Better yet, let them manage it.

kinda like owners and darfts!!

---

This is the gobbledygook that I got when trying to sign on yesterday. All this time working on it and they still got it messed up!

[...]

Their main page had a bunch of javascript errors at one point. I'm thinking they just installed the new system(s) without any testing whatsoever. They're using their client base as their QA team, lol.

that, or they are throwing everything at the wall hoping it fixes the problem.

this is amateur hour stuff, I wouldn't trust them with a dollar of my money.

On second thought, theirs might be the most secure institution, after all nobody can get in!

---

I really don’t want to go through the hassle of moving my accounts to another institution. It’s not a crisis because I can still use my cards and the bills are getting paid but it’s starting to wear thin. To muck up something so horribly and for so long that should have been seamless is not exactly confidence inspiring. I would like to think the proper measures are being taken to protect everyone’s money but this sure does put a target on their back.

---

I really don’t want to go through the hassle of moving my accounts to another institution. It’s not a crisis because I can still use my cards and the bills are getting paid but it’s starting to wear thin. To muck up something so horribly and for so long that should have been seamless is not exactly confidence inspiring. I would like to think the proper measures are being taken to protect everyone’s money but this sure does put a target on their back.

I'm sure that Wells Fargo would be glad to take in your $6.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

I really don’t want to go through the hassle of moving my accounts to another institution. It’s not a crisis because I can still use my cards and the bills are getting paid but it’s starting to wear thin. To muck up something so horribly and for so long that should have been seamless is not exactly confidence inspiring. I would like to think the proper measures are being taken to protect everyone’s money but this sure does put a target on their back.

I'm sure that Wells Fargo would be glad to take in your $6.

Nuh uh. I ain't moving my retirement fund.

---

I really don’t want to go through the hassle of moving my accounts to another institution. It’s not a crisis because I can still use my cards and the bills are getting paid but it’s starting to wear thin. To muck up something so horribly and for so long that should have been seamless is not exactly confidence inspiring. I would like to think the proper measures are being taken to protect everyone’s money but this sure does put a target on their back.

I'm sure that Wells Fargo would be glad to take in your $6.

....speaking of banks I'd never do business with...

---

I'm sure that Wells Fargo would be glad to take in your $6.

Nuh uh. I ain't moving my retirement fund.

That's equivalent to $1,490,925.85 Venezuelan Bolivars.   Not to bad for a retirement plan !!!

---

The Chief Experience Officer (whatever the hell that is) for Vystar, Joel Swanson, also sits on the BoD for the IT company which screwed things up. I’m not familiar with the complexities of executive nepotism. Is this typical?

 https://www.nymbus.com/about/

Not weird at all. You would be shocked to see how many CEOs and c-suite people sit on boards at other companies. As long as they aren't competitors, no issues and they are generally just collecting additional money.

I've been on a project at a Client where our company should have walked away because of screw ups and delays that the client was causing. Millions underwater later, it was finally delivered. The client's CEO sat on the BOD of our company, so of course it got done no matter how much it cost so the CEO didn't get thrown out.

I'd love to know what the REAL issue was/is.  They should have been able to just back out of the change and go back to the old system until they figured out the issue.  That is just extremely poor planning.

I'm guessing this was not just a front-end website change. This had to be a backend system change that they couldn't keep running in parallel.

Normally you would roll this out slowly and route a % of traffic to the new website. Then monitor it for issues and feedback. If there were problems, you turn the routing off until you fix it.

The only thing that makes sense why they couldn't do that is because they went to a new data storage and/or structure. Instead of spending the money to then keep the legacy and new system in sync for all transactions, they probably chose the cheap option of just backing it up and switching over.

Whoever made that decision should be fired.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

---

The Chief Experience Officer (whatever the hell that is) for Vystar, Joel Swanson, also sits on the BoD for the IT company which screwed things up. I’m not familiar with the complexities of executive nepotism. Is this typical?

 https://www.nymbus.com/about/

Not weird at all. You would be shocked to see how many CEOs and c-suite people sit on boards at other companies. As long as they aren't competitors, no issues and they are generally just collecting additional money.

I've been on a project at a Client where our company should have walked away because of screw ups and delays that the client was causing. Millions underwater later, it was finally delivered. The client's CEO sat on the BOD of our company, so of course it got done no matter how much it cost so the CEO didn't get thrown out.

I'd love to know what the REAL issue was/is.  They should have been able to just back out of the change and go back to the old system until they figured out the issue.  That is just extremely poor planning.

I'm guessing this was not just a front-end website change. This had to be a backend system change that they couldn't keep running in parallel.

Normally you would roll this out slowly and route a % of traffic to the new website. Then monitor it for issues and feedback. If there were problems, you turn the routing off until you fix it.

The only thing that makes sense why they couldn't do that is because they went to a new data storage and/or structure. Instead of spending the money to then keep the legacy and new system in sync for all transactions, they probably chose the cheap option of just backing it up and switching over.

Whoever made that decision should be fired.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Sounds more to me like they went with an entirely new system, which would mean there would be no real prospect of going back, particularly if banking regulations were the reason for the cut over to a new system. If it was just integrating to new external Financial systems, then that should be more easily testable and fixable.

---

"Remember Red, Hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies."  - Andy Dufresne, The Shawshank Redemption

Not weird at all. You would be shocked to see how many CEOs and c-suite people sit on boards at other companies. As long as they aren't competitors, no issues and they are generally just collecting additional money.

I've been on a project at a Client where our company should have walked away because of screw ups and delays that the client was causing. Millions underwater later, it was finally delivered. The client's CEO sat on the BOD of our company, so of course it got done no matter how much it cost so the CEO didn't get thrown out.



I'm guessing this was not just a front-end website change. This had to be a backend system change that they couldn't keep running in parallel.

Normally you would roll this out slowly and route a % of traffic to the new website. Then monitor it for issues and feedback. If there were problems, you turn the routing off until you fix it.

The only thing that makes sense why they couldn't do that is because they went to a new data storage and/or structure. Instead of spending the money to then keep the legacy and new system in sync for all transactions, they probably chose the cheap option of just backing it up and switching over.

Whoever made that decision should be fired.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Sounds more to me like they went with an entirely new system, which would mean there would be no real prospect of going back, particularly if banking regulations were the reason for the cut over to a new system. If it was just integrating to new external Financial systems, then that should be more easily testable and fixable.

I'm sure they tested it but it appears they missed something in the migration or sizing. Banks have very high testing standards, so don't see how they wouldn't have tested it.

What I meant by the data storage or structure changing is that they were moving to a new platform or completely changing the backend. That way the legacy front-end no longer works with the new platform. If they build code to keep the data in sync across both, they could run in parallel.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

---

I know of a few really big companies having major issues with computer systems now I'm wondering if it's connected someone screwing with software

---

Sounds more to me like they went with an entirely new system, which would mean there would be no real prospect of going back, particularly if banking regulations were the reason for the cut over to a new system. If it was just integrating to new external Financial systems, then that should be more easily testable and fixable.

I'm sure they tested it but it appears they missed something in the migration or sizing. Banks have very high testing standards, so don't see how they wouldn't have tested it.

What I meant by the data storage or structure changing is that they were moving to a new platform or completely changing the backend. That way the legacy front-end no longer works with the new platform. If they build code to keep the data in sync across both, they could run in parallel.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Don't know man; some financial institutions have such Antiquated systems and software (think Honeywell mainframes running ANSI COBOL) that there's no telling what they migrated from or to. I've seen some real odd systems over the years, especially during Y2K when everyone was moving off large IBM or Honeywell platforms to client server or distributed middleware systems.

---

"Remember Red, Hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies."  - Andy Dufresne, The Shawshank Redemption

I'm sure they tested it but it appears they missed something in the migration or sizing. Banks have very high testing standards, so don't see how they wouldn't have tested it.

What I meant by the data storage or structure changing is that they were moving to a new platform or completely changing the backend. That way the legacy front-end no longer works with the new platform. If they build code to keep the data in sync across both, they could run in parallel.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Don't know man; some financial institutions have such Antiquated systems and software (think Honeywell mainframes running ANSI COBOL) that there's no telling what they migrated from or to. I've seen some real odd systems over the years, especially during Y2K when everyone was moving off large IBM or Honeywell platforms to client server or distributed middleware systems.

I know, currently working with mostly industrial clients and a lot of them are still using mainframes for their business critical systems. I haven't worked with Banks in a while but the account and transaction data is usually on older systems. Then all the front-end, fraud, customer info, etc is what gets updated.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

---

I know of a few really big companies having major issues with computer systems now I'm wondering if it's connected someone screwing with software

This seems to be a smallish local copy that Vystar chose to invest in. I guess the investment gets them free services or something but it obviously wasn't a good deal for them. There isn't a lot of info on what they actually provide and they appear to be a mostly remote company. Regulations could keep the data in the US, so they my be forced to use people in the US but they appear to use contractors for development.

You would be surprised at how stupid a lot of developers are. They may know how to write some code but if you ask them to think outside of the box, most of them can't. Offshore resources are full of people like this. I ask very few programming questions in interviews and stick to open ended stuff to find out if they have any problem solving skills at all. I don't want people who I have to basically document everything in so much detail that I could just write the code myself faster.

There were a few security risks that affected a lot of software recently but not sure what exactly you are referencing. Biggest problem in IT is all these companies try to cheap out and outsource everything. I get paid well because of this but most of the companies don't have anyone on their payroll that actually knows what is going on and can support the systems. Everything is being run through other companies and adding offshore makes it even worse. Quality isn't kept and even the outsourcing companies can't keep the people that get trained and they jump somewhere else quickly.

When problems happen they have to call someone else to fix it. Cloud is also making it worse for that side but is great for a lot of things.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

---

The website has been down all day.

---

The website has been down all day.

Yea now it's beyond inconvenient. It doesn't feel like they're going to fix this fully anytime soon.

---

It must be bad. I saw a couple of picketers outside the Bartram branch yesterday. In the midday heat.

---

"Remember Red, Hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies."  - Andy Dufresne, The Shawshank Redemption

Welp it's down again hopefully not for as long this time

---

The mobile app is now working. If you previously downloaded the new version, delete and download again.

---