At Amazon’s AWS re: Invent conference earlier this month, the company announced a new platform for mainframe migration and modernization called simply “AWS Mainframe Modernization,” which aims to help AWS customers get off their mainframes “as fast as they can” to take better advantage of the cloud.

Today, customers may take a couple of different paths to get off their mainframes—either they take a “lift and shift” approach and bring their application pretty much as is, or they may refactor and break the application down as microservices in the cloud. But neither path is all that easy, and the process can take months or even years to complete as customers must evaluate the complexity of the application’s source code, understand the dependencies on other systems, convert or re-compile the code, and then everything must be tested to make sure it all works.

“It can be a messy business and involves a lot of moving pieces. And it isn’t something that people really want to do on their own,” said Adam Selipsky, CEO of AWS, speaking at the press event. “And while AWS Partners can help with the transition, it can still take a long time,” he added.

The new solution, AWS Mainframe Modernization, instead will make it faster to migrate, modernize and run mainframe applications on AWS. The company claims that it can cut the time to move mainframe workloads to the cloud by as much as two-thirds, using its set of development, test, and deployment tools and a mainframe-compatible runtime environment. The solution will also help customers assess and analyze their mainframe applications for readiness, then help them choose which path they want to take—re-platforming or refactoring—and then come up with a plan.

If the customer wants to re-platform, the Mainframe Modernization solution will offer compilers to convert code and testing services to make sure no functionality is lost during the translation. If the customer wants to refactor or decompose the application—if the components could be run in Amazon’s EC2 service, in containers, or in the Lambda service, for instance—then they can use the Mainframe Modernization solution to convert the COBOL code automatically over to Java. A Migration Hub lets customers track their migration progress across multiple AWS Partners and solutions from a single location.
​
Amazon touts the system as being an agile and cost-efficient (with on-demand, pay-as-you-go resources) managed service that offers security and high availability, scalability, and elasticity.

Many readers of this newsletter know I spent four decades speaking to business, professional and academic audiences about the future of technology. In my research for material for Technology This Week, I found a marvelous lecture by former MIT professor Patrick Winston called "How to Speak." The lecture was posted on YouTube a few months after Winston's death in 2019 and has since been viewed just under 5 million times.

Winston, who taught at MIT for almost 50 years and was one of the school's most beloved professors, knew how to captivate an audience. His style wasn’t flashy, but it was extremely compelling—even more noteworthy when you consider he worked in the technical field of artificial intelligence.

If you invest an hour and watch the full lecture, and I highly recommend you do, you'll learn some invaluable tips that will make you not only a better speaker, but a better communicator. However, you'll also discover a priceless gem in the first five minutes of the talk, when Winston describes what he calls the "rule of engagement." It's a simple, non-negotiable policy, and it's only five words long. 

Winston's rule: When someone else is speaking:
                                                   "No laptops. No cell phones."

Although simple, this is a rule that almost no one today follows, and that makes it extremely valuable. Winston's rule of engagement is also a perfect example of emotional intelligence in real life: the ability to make emotions work for you, instead of against you.

Making a Better Listener. Winston explains the reasoning behind his rule of engagement. "Some people ask why [no laptops, no cell phones] is a rule of engagement," says Winston. "The answer is, we humans only have one language processor. And if your language processor is engaged, you're distracted. And worse yet, you distract the people around you—studies have shown that."

Back in the 1950s, psychologist Donald Broadbent proved a similar point by setting up subjects with headphones that were putting out two different messages at the same time, one to each ear. Afterwards, Broadbent tested the subjects on their ability to retain the information. 

What was Broadbent's conclusion? We can only listen to one voice at a time.

But how can the "no laptops, no cell phones" rule of engagement help you and your organization?

The Effect on Relationships. Nowadays, people are accustomed to respond to electronic messages immediately, and there's some good to that. When you respond quickly to others' messages, you provide information they need to move their work forward. Additionally, you show you value them.

However, in your efforts to respond quickly, you might also make a big mistake. By constantly checking your phone, even when you're in a meeting or conversation with others, you leave your conversation partner feeling that you aren't really "present"--and that you don’t care about them or the conversation. 

Just think of all the lost time in meetings in which someone repeats something that's already been said or goes off on a tangent because they were distracted and missed a key point.

True listening and collaboration require complete attention. And if you're speaking with another person, that person thought you were important enough to give you their time and attention. Why not return the honor?
You'd be surprised at the positive benefits these actions reap—and the depth and quality it adds to your relationships.

So, if you'd like to increase the quality of your meetings, conversations, and even your relationships, take a page out of Patrick Winston's playbook:
                                                   "No laptops. No cell phones."

​Because you can only listen to one voice at a time.

AR has populated science fiction, specialized industries, and high-tech experiments for decades. But in the 2010s, major companies—and countless startups—began treating AR headsets as a potential mass-market platform.

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg predicted in 2017 that televisions and phones would be replaced by holographic glasses. Apple CEO Tim Cook called AR “a big idea, like the smartphone.” Microsoft envisioned people watching the Super Bowl in its HoloLens headset. Google launched its ambitious Glass platform as a potential successor to phones, then helped propel the AR startup Magic Leap toward billions of dollars in investments. More recently, telecoms have partnered with AR companies like the Chinese startup Nreal, hoping high-bandwidth holograms will create a demand for 5G networks.

These companies’ products—as well as those of other major players, including Snap, Vuzix, and Niantic—often look very different. But most of them promise a uniquely powerful combination of three features.

• Their hardware is wearable, hands-free, and potentially always on—you don’t have to grab a device and put it away when you’re done using it
• Their images and audio can blend with or compensate for normal sensory perception of the world, rather than being confined to a discrete, self-contained screen
• Their sensors and software can collect and analyze huge amounts of information about their surroundings—through geolocation and depth sensing, computer vision programs, or intimate biometric technology like eye-tracking cameras

Over the past decade, nobody has managed to merge these capabilities into a mainstream consumer device. Most glasses are bulky, and the images they produce are shaky, transparent, or cut off by a limited field of view. Nobody has developed a surefire way to interact with them either, despite experiments with voice controls, finger tracking, and handheld hardware.

Despite this, we’ve gotten hints of the medium’s power and challenges—and even skeptics of the tech should pay attention to them.

In 2016, for instance, millions of people fell in love with the phone-based AR game Pokémon Go. When players logged on to catch virtual monsters, many discovered parts of their neighborhoods they’d never thought to visit. But they also found a world built on data that placed more gyms and PokéStops in white and affluent neighborhoods. They forged in-person connections by sharing virtual experiences, but those connections could also allow for real-world harassment.

The effects went beyond people who played the game. The owners of some homes near Pokémon Go gyms experienced a sudden influx of trespassers, leading a few to sue its developer Niantic and secure tweaks to the game’s design. Public memorials like the US Holocaust Museum asked players to respect the space by not chasing virtual monsters into it. Even this early foray into augmented reality exported some of the internet’s biggest flaws—like its ability to collapse context and overwhelm individuals with its sheer scale—into physical space.

Writer and researcher Erica Neely says that laws and social norms aren’t prepared for how AR could affect physical space. “I think we’re kind of frantically running behind the technology,” she says. In 2019, Neely wrote about the issues that Pokémon Go had exposed around augmented locations. Those issues mostly haven’t been settled, she says. And dedicated AR hardware will only intensify them.
​
Smartphone cameras—along with digital touchup apps like FaceTune and sophisticated image searches like Snap Scan and Google Lens—have already complicated our relationships with the offline world. But AR glasses could add an ease and ubiquity that our phones can’t manage. “A phone-based app you have to actually go to,” says Neely. “You are making a conscious choice to engage with it.” Glasses remove even the light friction of unlocking your screen and deliberately looking through a camera lens.

If you're among the millions of people who use payment apps like PayPal, Venmo, Square, and other third-party electronic payment networks, you could be affected by a tax reporting change that goes into effect in January. 

Payment app providers will have to start reporting to the IRS a user's business transactions if, in aggregate, they total $600 or more for the year. A business transaction is defined as payment for a good or service.

Prior to this change, app providers only had to send the IRS a Form 1099-K if an individual account had at least 200 business transactions in a year and if those transactions combined resulted in gross payments of at least $20,000.

The expansion of the reporting rule results from a provision in the American Rescue Plan, which was signed into law earlier this year. The aim of the provision is to clamp down on unreported, taxable income. 

Keep in mind, the new reporting threshold does not change your basic tax responsibilities. Income you receive for a good or service—including tips—has always been reportable and, most times, taxable. 

And you've always been responsible for reporting it on your tax return, regardless of whether a third party sends the information to the IRS.

The rule change also does not make other transactions suddenly taxable. For instance, your friend sending you money on Venmo to reimburse you for their half of last night's dinner tab will not become taxable.

The biggest change is the increased visibility the IRS will have into business income transactions, both those that have always been reported by the income recipient and those that haven't been. 

In theory, the only people who should be worried about the rule change are those who weren't reporting all their business income. "Those who are tax evaders, who violated the self-reporting rules and used the old thresholds to avoid paying taxes," said Scott Talbott, spokesperson for the Electronic Transaction Association.
But, tax experts say, the threshold change could mean some administrative hassles for many tax filers who use payment apps, whether or not they're engaged in business transactions.

"These third-party settlement entities may not know for sure if they are dealing with a business or an individual or if they are dealing with a payment for goods or services, or a non-taxable transaction. It is going to be up to the taxpayer, if they receive a 1099 in any form for a nontaxable event, such as splitting rent among roommates, splitting a dinner bill, or even selling something on eBay for less than you paid for it, to explain to the IRS that the 1099 was received for a non-taxable transaction," said Mark Luscombe, principal analyst for tax publisher Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting.

Also, Luscombe noted, there's a fair chance your business transactions may be reported in duplicate—for instance, if you're a freelancer or independent contractor, you might get a 1099-K from your payment app provider, as well as a 1099-NEC or 1099-MISC from your client for the same transaction.

"Again, the taxpayer will have to explain to the IRS that the two 1099s are for the same transaction," he said.

Each app provider must decide which procedures it will use to accommodate the rule change and will need to alert their customers about what will be required of them to better identify the nature of their transactions.

For instance, PayPal, which now owns Venmo, recently put out an initial Q&A for users of both apps. It noted that "In the coming months, we may ask you to provide tax information like your Employer Identification Number (EIN), Individual Tax ID Number (ITIN) or Social Security Number (SSN), if you haven't provided it to us already."
​
The net effect of the new reporting requirements for users of payment apps may be that some will ask customers to pay them in cash—at least for smaller amounts, like tips. Or, as Luscombe noted, they may decide to only use an app for taxable business transactions and keep their other, non-taxable transactions separate.