Y2K: Bor-ing!

It's been a lousy year for The End Of The World.

By Frank Hayes 07/12/99 Dang! By now I was expecting stories of rioting in the streets as a hundred thousand unpaid state and municipal workers stormed city halls and state houses demanding their wages. I figured the cities would be burning, the freeways would be drag strips and the garbage would be piled high in the summer heat. After all, wasn't July 1 the day most states and cities started Fiscal Year 2000? And wasn't that supposed to signal the first wave of major-league Y2K computer crashes and the beginning of The End Of The World As We Know It? The End Of The World hasn't had a very good year in 1999. Deadline after Y2K deadline is marching by, and no one seems to notice. They don't notice because, for the most part, things aren't failing. July 1 came and went, and state and city governments are still running, paychecks are showing up and computers aren't crashing. That's the boring reality of Y2K: business as usual. The Y2K-is-a-hoax crowd, of course, explains that nothing has happened because, well, Y2K is a hoax. The end-of-the-worlders insist things will fall apart -- we've just been miraculously lucky so far. Nope. This boring Y2K reality is one you've literally created. A million programmers are bashing their brains out to beat the millennium bug. And with each step toward success, the biggest technology story of the decade gets a little more, well, boring. Which is why IT people aren't getting any notice, much less any thanks, from TV networks and local newspapers. The End Of The World would have been a pretty big story, maybe bigger than Jordan and Gretzky and Elway all retiring. But business as usual isn't news. It's boring. Matter of fact, there's lots of Y2K good news that hasn't been getting much play in the papers. Like the steady stream of announcements by little, local electric companies we've never heard of, that their power generating systems have passed Y2K tests. Those are exactly the kind of small outfits, crucial to the infrastructure, that year 2000 experts feared wouldn't have their Y2K act together. But they do. No news. Boring. U.S. and Canadian airlines say they're 95% ready. Boeing and Lockheed and Airbus say the planes will fly. Automakers say their cars will run properly. And 98% of banks are ready, automated teller machines and all, according to federal bank examiners. On Jan. 1, it appears nothing will go wrong. Boring, boring, boring. Maybe the biggest nonstory is the fact that, though we've already thrown something like a trillion dollars at fixing the year 2000 problem, the U.S. economy is still chugging along. Y2K is the biggest IT project in history, and it hasn't slowed business down. So it's not news. And how did this non-news happen? A few years ago, we were galloping toward the edge of a millennial cliff, kidding ourselves that Y2K was a problem only for mainframe dinosaurs. No sweat. Now, after years of sweat by IT shops, things are looking pretty ... well, ordinary. The Y2K disaster prophecies and conspiracy theories are rapidly dwindling from real threats to the kind of bad fantasy we'd expect from a supermarket tabloid. You did that, IT people. You, and nobody else. You won't get credit on Page 1 of your local newspaper or as the top story on the nightly news. Those spots are reserved for catastrophes -- not catastrophes avoided. But we made it past July 1, and we're well on the way to New Year's Day, so somebody ought to say it: Congratulations. And thanks. Hayes, Computerworld's staff columnist, has covered IT for 20 years. His e-mail addres

-- corrine (corrine@iwayne.net), July 13, 1999

Answers

Just wait until this time next year. It may well be a different world then. Articles like this do no good whatsoever in coaxing small businesses to take it seriously, or get individuals to consider taking steps to portect themselves. It doesn't matter if Y2K is boring.

-- (dot@dot.dot), July 13, 1999.

above can be found at: http://www.computerworld.com/home/print.nsf/all/990712B4AE

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), July 13, 1999.

Sheeoooo-- the new math explains everything 1999=2000. if they got their % stats using the same math everthing should be OK. 80%=100% Etc.

Ok folks, nothing left to see here. everybody go home.

-- DOC (hoping_for@the_best.com), July 13, 1999.

Boring! This reminds me of those in England at the very start of WWII in 1939 who called it the "Bore War" since nothing in Poland was really affecting them....yet.

-- smfdoc (smfdoc@aol.com), July 13, 1999.

Oooh. The Doomies will be up in arms over the fact that he NAILED this story. And perhaps an appropriate time to trot out the Doom leaders failed prognostications...

"... I believe we'll start seeing [disruptions] by this summer, and I believe they'll continue for at least a year. As many people are now aware, 46 states (along with Australia and New Zealand) will begin their 1999-2000 fiscal year on July 1, 1999; New York (and Canada) will already have gone through their Y2K fiscal rollover on April 1, and the remaining three states begin their new fiscal year on August 1, September 1, and October 1. We also have the GPS rollover problem to look forward to on August 22nd, as well as the Federal government's new fiscal year on October 1st.

There is, of course, some finite probability that all of these rollover events will occur without any problems; but there's also a finite probability that pigs will learn to fly."

-- Ed "Flying Pig" Yourdon

April 1, 1999. On this date, Canada, Japan, and the State of New York begin their fiscal year. This will, of course, include dates beyond Y2K. As a result, planning systems, especially budgets that have not been repaired will fail as they attempt to process Y2K dates. Since New York City is the media capitol of the world, problems there will grab headlines worldwide. Problems in Japan will remind everyone again of how interconnected our world is. The Japanese will also be forced to admit that there systems might not make it. I expect the stock market to react and begin (or continue) its downward spiral. Public confidence will continue to wane and the number of Y2K optimists will continue to dwindle.

July 1, 1999. On this date, forty-four U.S. states begin their fiscal years. The problems that began in New York will now spread exponentially across the country and around the world. The public will feel the global and pervasive nature of the Y2K Problem for the first time. This will be further exacerbated by the fact that many states have not had the resources to adequately address their Millennium Bug problems. Consequently, the failures will be real and widespread.

From the 12 Oct 1998 issue of Westergaard - Michael "Wrong Again" Hyatt

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), July 13, 1999.

July 13 - hmmmmn.

No monthly reports, totals, checks, money transfers, defaults, no faults, or results would be expected to show up yet. And, if there were problems, would the governments report them?

When WOULD an internal (government-government) computer data problem involoving a fiscal year become evident? Would it be evident (outside of the department itself?)

If a computer failed to fall in the woods, would a report still be generated? Or would a tree be saved?

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 13, 1999.

Kinda shoots holes in all those "conspiracy theories" being tossed around here as to why there is not more Y2k media coverage doesn't it.

-- CD (not@here.com), July 13, 1999.

I'mnot sure where you are coming from in your answer there CD:

A very short review of the tremendous number of "news" stories released by the general press confirms that the ones printed for national distribution almost exclusively are very optimistic, include the government's favorite buzz-words and "alarmist buttons, and are following the exact pattern of mass-missinformation amid "glamorous" headlines of "predicted progress" towards "total compliance" and "keep you money in the banks."

The overwhelming message generated by the compliant national media is (as they dutifully copy the "press releases" from Mr K's office) is pollyannish. And all of the Washington Dc press corps rewards (access, exclusives, interviews, releases, and priviledges) are no doubt being properly dispensed to these willing reporters.

Conspiracy? As an active, deliberate effort to mislead the public - the conspiracy need only exist between 3-4 people - starting in the Oval Office and going little further than that. The rest (given a press corps so wedded to this administration as shown during the impeachment miscoverage) happens through neglect, incompetence, and individual prejudices, coupled with a herd instinct that deflects the "common knowledge" towards a simplistic "want it to be all better" group think.

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 13, 1999.

sssooooooo bor-ring in the lolly trolly lazy easy days of mid-summer. Yawn. No problems nowhere, hype looks pretty silly, buncha grasping dehydrated powder vendors peddling baseless hysteria.

Come to think of it, there ain't no rain, cold, floods, freezes, snow, ice, or nuttin stooopid like that now. No, those things are laughable now, wimp worries, shove not-now-reality aside and roll over in the sun, Sally could you massage my feet with suntan oil, there that's nice all is right with the world. Let those psychotic doomers prepare for nothing two whole seasons away.

What, Sally, can't hear you, jolly rock 'n roll in my headdrones, what, a mole on the sole of left foot, so? it's big and blotchy and raised and dark? so? No, I'm not like those idiot hypochondriack doomers, running to the Doctor every second I see a freckle. Just massage and give me pleasure, Sally. Everything is fine.



-- trollala (mole@6months.exit), July 13, 1999.

A few other thoughts - much remediation has been accomplished - let us not forget that the first systems remediated should be those first to be exposed to potential failure: the fiscal year processing and review packages.

Also, let us look at the situation ONLY after the first two paycheck and automatic deposit transactions have cleared successfully. Today - the 13th - I would expect very few (if any) things to actually be run - much less display symptoms of failure.

To declare FY2000 a non-event - as this writer clearly believes (and as we all hope becomes the case!) the process must actually work, not simply be assumed to be working because nothing is reported. So, let us look at insurance deposits, at retirement fund investments, and payrolls and tax offices, at legistlative and agency computers, before judging.

And in any case, would you really expect "rioting" from any government worker? (Postal employees excepted!) 8<)

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 13, 1999.

yeah, the military trained for rioting by federal clerical workers

-- pencils (sharpened@your.expense), July 13, 1999.

Y2K Pro, you are way too funny!

-- Ed "Flying Pig" Yourdon, what a riot!

By the way, 1999 does not == 2000, but 2000=2000. On July 1, systems started FY2000, not FY1999. In Washington state, I see NOTHING as I've noted in other posts. Now the argument has changed.. It's really the embedded chips that will blow up in our face.. come on.

Yeah, IM PREPARED. Because we might really have an earthquake (being on the pacific rim, and having two minor ones last week). It's stupid not to have any preparations when you can spend a crummy 500 bucks for the basics.

Just the same, it's been a boring summer so far.

Bryce

-- Bryce (bryce@seanet.com), July 13, 1999.

Corrine1:

You've just reminded me of someone that my brother once told me about. He's a self-employed tax accountant, and one day took off on a lark and spent the day as one of thousands of unpaid extras on the set of Born On the Fourth of July. While he was people watching, the stranger next to him said, "Everybody here is such a loser!"

Which makes me have to ask... Corrine1, how do you explain your presence here?

Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr near Monterey, California

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage.neener.autospammers--regrets.greenspun), July 13, 1999.

Corrine1:

You've just reminded me of someone that my brother once told me about. He's a self-employed tax accountant, and one day took off on a lark and spent the day as one of thousands of unpaid extras on the set of Born On the Fourth of July. While he was people watching, the stranger next to him said, "Everybody here is such a loser!"

Which makes me have to ask... Corrine1, how do you explain your presence here?

Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr near Monterey, California


-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage.neener.autospammers--regrets.greenspun), July 13, 1999.

I really do hope the this "boring" article is relevant in a few months.

Mike =====================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), July 13, 1999.

To my fellow assembled students, and the various pop-in pollies who care to join our discussion:

We have evidently just experienced another "web page" html problem - occuring somewhere in the previous two postings for some unknown reason. To illustrate the difficulty of removing simple computer problems, let us see how long it takes to fix the columns.

To the various "software professionals" who so gratefully contributed to our previous lesson, please note: I didn't put it there. I'm just trying to get it fixed.

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 13, 1999.

wow...now this is an interesting situation.......

-- what's up? (I'm no sysop@TBy2k.com), July 13, 1999.

I have no clue Robert but in viewin the source this kinda stands out

yes? no?

Mike =====================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), July 13, 1999.

Well, the columns are broken and we're trying to get them fixed.

In the meantime, you'll have to use bottled water.

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 13, 1999.

The 2 ten yr old boys and 1 teen killed in Bellingham were probably not bored. The computer failure caused 277,000 gallons of gas to spiil into the creek they were in. I wonder if people call their parents "doomers?"

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), July 13, 1999.

well...I have some good news and some bad news Robert : )

I think I found the bad code...that's the good news, it's in Dancr's posts...

the bad news is being totally clueless I copied and pasted it into my post and hey... what do you know... that code stuff screws things up that way too... even when I put it in quotes.

Sorry...it's in the lead tag stuff at the beginning.

Mike ===============================================================

-- Mike (I'm no code jockey) Taylor (stickin' to design@aol.com), July 13, 1999.

Robert,

My point is twofold.

1) Many here have expressed their disgust at the lack of what they perceive to be "balanced" reporting by the media. I feel the article sums up the current state of Y2k very neatly...In the absence of obvious and verifiable bad news, the general public finds it all quite boring. From the article: "But business as usual isn't news. It's boring. Matter of fact, there's lots of Y2K good news that hasn't been getting much play in the papers." Boring does not sell newspapers. When an occasional sewage spill pops up however, the media jumps on it. There is a story to tell. People are interested.

2) Many people here extrapolate and conclude there is a grand conspiracy going on in media/government circles. (Your comments above were a good example of this.) Let me ask you something. Is the media in every other country in the world in on this conspiracy too?

-- CD (not@here.com), July 13, 1999.

If there is a media 'conspiracy', it's not anything deliberately orchestrated by some people in high places, but rather imposed by the form of the medium. Let's face it, computer problems not happening makes for the worst possible TV!

Some effort has been made to cover the potential for problems, which doesn't televise well either. From a media perspective, they're now out on a limb a short ways. They said these problems might happen, now they have to show them happening.

Hayes has it right, in saying that if the IT people perform miracles and we dodge this bullet, nobody notices a thing. If they don't, they get the blame. Success isn't even as exciting as reading: Toreador 1, Bull 0. Unless the bull wins, there wasn't even a bullfight.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), July 13, 1999.

Conspiracy to supress information? Yes, I think it's pretty clear. Where do I get that far-out idea? From the U.S. Naval War College site, which talks about a "whisper" campaign." THis can be interpreted (extrapolated) to mean that the authorities place a well- designed hint at certain top corporate levels. It comes down to the CBS news room like this: The chairman of the board says to the head of news: "Advertisers will cancel if we do any of the doomsday news coverage you had planned." Head of news to producer: "We're looking to compete with NBC, head to head. They aren't doing Y2K--let's hold off on that." Producer to staff: "The public has no interest in Y2K scare stories. Low rating there." Everyone nods and that's it. WE think all is well. Stability holds...for the nonce.

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), July 13, 1999.

(1) If you are doing Y2K remediation and something is going to fail early, you fix it early.

(2) What we are dealing with is a fault tolerance problem. If the faults can be dealt with, no systemic problem. If the faults overwhelm the tolerance, major problem. I know of sytems that are failing, but manual workarounds are in place. I also know of others that have been remediated early because of their propensity for early failure.

(3) Check again about, say, August 24.

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), July 13, 1999.

testing a fix, maybe

-- perchance (fix it@try.again), July 13, 1999.

that had the opposite effect, another "fix" made worse

-- not fixed (computers@throwout.window), July 13, 1999.

FOF = FUBAR

-- next (good@luck.column), July 13, 1999.

Mara,

I'll ask you what I asked Robert. Is this "conspiracy" being secrectly shared by all the media in all the other countries of the world also?

-- CD (not@here.com), July 13, 1999.

Yesterday, I started putting a target at the beginning of all my posts. I thought I was so clever, because then I could make a list of them on my web page, and people could click on my links, and it would go directly to what I personally had said on the topic. My plan had been to write up a more prose-like coverage on y2k using these better targeted links. I'm sorry if this is causing a problem in the formatting. I thought I did it the right way. I'll stop. (I didn't do it on this post) Is there a friendly way I can do this? (Please reply privately, since this is off topic) By the way, I can't see the formatting problem from here.

I also started taking out my e-mail, because I started getting a lot of hard core porn after posting here. I have kids, here... I do put my real e-mail when starting a thread. I assume this is ok.

Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr near Monterey, California

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage.neener.autospammers--regrets.greenspun), July 13, 1999.

NO there is NO media conspiracy to suppress information. How very foolish that anyone would think this! However, it might be a good time for criminals to move to NEBRASKA! Hahahahaha!

Media coverup

-- no no no (no@nothingwronghere.nope), July 13, 1999.

If it is any help, in correcting the problem, here are most of the other places where I have committed the error:

Pascal's Wager & Y2K Surviving in the Suburbs Self Reliance & Self Sufficiency Pressure Canner Treadle Beware

If you want to talk to me about this, I can be reached at minddancr@aol.com

Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr near Monterey, California

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage.neener.autospammers--regrets.greenspun), July 13, 1999.

Y2K=AoK

First reported here near July 4, 1999.

The Fix is in, it has been fixed.

Sell those generators to some other sucka!

-- No (Problem@all.com), July 13, 1999.

I never can see all of the cool stuff Robert talks about. He has to send me a zipped file of what he sees. I don't think I can fix it either, cause I can't see it, but I'll try.... Robert?

-- Gayla (privacy@please.com), July 13, 1999.

Duh,

Did I sleep late again? I must have missed the last five and a half months of my life! Gee, the last time I checked, they called it the Y2K problem. Why do we keep bringing up the "various dates in 1999" problem? Oh, sure, blame the "experts" for being wrong about "all" those look-ahead programs.

How many times do I have to say this. Maybe I should make a rubber stamp... THE NUMBER OF PROGRAMS THAT DO LOOK-AHEAD PROCESSING IS TINY WHEN COMPARED TO THE TOTAL (IE. MAINFRAME - PC - EMBEDDED SYSTEM) NUMBER OF PROGRAMS THAT HAVE A DATE PROBLEM. THESE PROGRAMS WOULD BE FIXED FIRST, BECAUSE THEY ARE NEEDED FIRST!!!!!!!!!!

Got it? <:)=

PS - Got a problem with this? TELL ME ABOUT IT! Be prepared to talk about PROGRAMMING!!!!!!!!!!

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), July 13, 1999.

I'm not sure that I've ever read such an enormous piece of garbage as the piece spewed out of Frank Hayes. I realize that it is naive of me to expect journalists to be neutral on issues. But come on! This rivals North's apocalyptic visions in it's pretentious self serving reasoning.

For those "Polly's" out there who would support the inane ramblings of a hack, take notice. Please realize that stupidity is a double edged sword. You speak of memes... What is this? It is largely unsupported balderdash that happens to be catchy. It tells you everything that you want to hear. The documented failures may not awe inspiring, but they do exist.

It's far too early in the game to declare that the problem is solved. This problem, as it always has, requires a level head. Nothing is more logical than seeing a problem and doing your best to solve it. Second best is preparing for the inevitable mess that will come falling around your ears. Merry Christmas.

-- too soon (SuchTripe@anearlydate.ooh), July 13, 1999.

CD,

Does the conspiracy extend to the foreign press? I don't know. It very well may--for the same reasons the press is being asked to keep silent here. "National security issues."

All I can say is that I find it damn spooky that we are not being periodically updated on Y2K concerns by the mainstream press when the issues are such enormous ones. Even if all you can imagine that will go wrong is in other countries, can't you see the tremendous impact it will have here? Or what even about humanitarian concerns or just the sheer news value of having a few countries like Russia and China go under.

All we hear on television thus far with rare exception is DEAD SILENCE. I find that eerie to a nerve wracking extent.

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), July 14, 1999.

Mara, you wrote:

"All I can say is that I find it damn spooky that we are not being periodically updated on Y2K concerns by the mainstream press when the issues are such enormous ones. Even if all you can imagine that will go wrong is in other countries, can't you see the tremendous impact it will have here? Or what even about humanitarian concerns or just the sheer news value of having a few countries like Russia and China go under. All we hear on television thus far with rare exception is DEAD SILENCE. I find that eerie to a nerve wracking extent."

I absolutely understand your concerns. I really do. All I'm trying to say here is that jumping to the conclusion that this lack of media attention is a result of a media/government contrived conspiracy may not be the correct assumption. Please re-read the article. You don't need to agree with the tech issues it mentions, but it's hard to disagree with the author's ultimate findings...Y2k is BORING to the general public in the absence of obvious and verifiable bad news. Can that not stand on it's own merit? Why must there be a conspiracy involved?

-- CD (not@here.com), July 14, 1999.

Has it even occured to people on this forum that things are being fixed? That for every one of you there are 2,000 people out there fixing the problems you are stressing (or hoping) about? Yep it has gone through your mind and that is why you fight the "good news" so dtrongly. After all, you have envisioned this different world, where you do not depend on society as it is now, but where you are self sufficient and have neighbors who think the same way you do.

A lot of us feel that way, personally I ignore my neighbors too, they are...well non human mostly, and I have lived with my grandparents in a self sufficient , out of society situation. But Y2K is not going to make it happen. If you want to live that way, you do not have to depend on Y2k to have it. Work with others who feel the same as you and make it happen anyway. Thats how communes happened in the 60's and 70's. and some still exist. But please do not expect everyone else to feel the way you do, you don't want them to make you feel the way they do, do you?

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), July 14, 1999.

Because nothing too serious has happened at tis point, mid 1999 (although there have been some fireworks due to y2k), you would assume the same for 2000??. That's not too smart.

Would you leave the fireworks show befor the big GRAND FINALE? No, I don't think so.. Well this y2k thingy could be anagolous to a fireworks show, and you know the finale is always WAAAAAAYYYYY better, bigger, and louder than the little sh*t in the middle.

Hmmmmmm.......

-- CygnusXI (noburnt@toast.net), July 14, 1999.

dancr. i made no comment on the article whatsoever. i ran across it, thought it worth the read and posted it. what on God's green earth is your problem? (please don't bother answering. your answer would be too bor-ring)

p.s. why do i picture you in a pink tu-tu? (don't answer.)

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), July 14, 1999.

Working hard, corr?

-- I still think (you're@troll.sweetiepie!), July 14, 1999.

Well - like y2k issues, the columns are still broke. As before, the screen captures are available upon request.

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 14, 1999.

ATTENTION EVERYONE! BOB COOK HAS SPOKEN!

Because his browser interprets tags differently than most

*Y2K CANNOT BE FIXED!*

Nice conclusion. Ignore the FACT that only a few others see the same thing you do, and extrapolate this to y2k problems; sounds fair. Has the forum crashed? is MIT down because of this? is the info UNREADABLE?

Or is it just an inconveniance to a few? Might be more like y2k than you think.

Thanks for the GREAT example BOB! your the best! I used to be scared of the unknown in y2k but this illustration really crystalized for me that it probably won't be too bad.

[just so you know the SYSOP has merely to edit the source code, looking for the "</b></u></a><td><a NAME="dancr"></a>" string and remove it, multiple times. This way BOB can unbunch his undies. In the mean time BOB can I suggest you get a *real* browser?]

-- Y2K is over (time@to.move.on), July 14, 1999.

The columns are still broken.

You are demonstrating the government's monopolistic attitude: "if I (the government) don't see a problem that affects me (the monopoly), then it must not be a problem. In the real world where there are competitors for a person's business, you (your company) would quickly go out of business.

But your attiude is typical of many who refuse to "look" at the evidence showing a problem. Instead, you want to "believe" there is no problem, and so decide there is no problem.

But the problem (despite your claims, despite your supposed fix) remains broke. And the columns will remain broke until the technicians really fix it, unlike your approach, where an administrator can easil;y "claim" it is fixed.

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 14, 1999.

HEY BOB! you better be careful or you might get a bruise trying to move your big fat head through doorways!

L-I-S-T-E-N C-A-R-E-F-U-L-L-Y!

*I* didn't claim any fix. *I* didn't claim there "was no problem" (but only YOU can see it) The SYSOP could fix this in a heartbeat, but because she is pessimistic, will most likely "leave this as an example" of y2k problems (the sysop even said she couldn't 'see' a problem on sysmans thread)

Take your head out of the sand BOB and look around.

-- Y2K is over (time@to.move.on), July 14, 1999.

Oh, BTW

Care to explain this?

-- Y2K is over (time@to.move.on), July 14, 1999.

Well - dear sir "over" - y2k isn't even here yet. It couldn't be over.

<<[just so you know the SYSOP has merely to edit the source code, looking for the "dancr" string and remove it, multiple times. >> -

This sounds like a "declared fix" to me. It didn't do anything, just like theadministrations claims of compliance, but it does look nice. I can only hope that the government programmers trying to fix real problems will be more effective.

And the columns are still broken. Despite administration's claims to the contrary - the real work has not been done. Only talked about being done to the press. Gee, they've done that before haven't they.

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 14, 1999.

BOB!...BUDDIE! I really am trying to be nice here!

"This sounds like a "declared fix" to me. It didn't do anything, just like the administrations claims of compliance, but it does look nice."

HELLOOOOOOOOOO?!?!? EARTH TO BOB!

I AM NOT THE SYSOP!

How can I implement the fix???? If you would like, I could cut the HTML code out and start a new thread (unless of course the sysops wants to give me the access I need to fix THIS thread!)

-- Y2K is over (time@to.move.on), July 14, 1999.

Read the article, thank you for the link:

Rubin said that "very" big bucks were spent on fixing Y2K problems (up to 50%!) that you claim are not going to be a problem. Said that most companies IT departments were "stagnant" as they froze their processes to try to get the problem fixed. I was hoping that the changes forced by the year 2000 conversions would prove to be an incentive to overhaul things and improve things.

Well - if these companies fixed the problem, the year 2000 problems they fixed won't be a problem. Certainly.

Did they fix all the problems in their own company? We hope so. Did the IT departments fix enough of the problems in enough of the companies? Doesn't appear so. Far less than half of US and Canadian companies (large through mid-sized) are complete, the rest are planning to fix -on-failure. The rest of the world is even further behind.

And the columns are still broke.

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 14, 1999.

Just for bobbie

-- Y2K is over (time@to.move.on), July 14, 1999.

I thank you very much.

But just like windowing, the root problem is not solved, but rather buried (actually a better word is transferred) to a different place.

For windowing, unlike the Fed's when they required the banking industry to jump to a single standard by forcing the transfer date to 2072/1973 by decree, other companies do not have that option so easily. Windowning only postpones actual solutions. This is an important step in potentially averting the crisis 01/01/2000, but actually only perpetuates the real problem.

Oh well, another day, another lesson. Another problem buried by the pollyanna's. Question, if an unsolved problem falls in the woods, is it still in the woods still unsolved?

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 14, 1999.

OH ----- MY-------GAWD!!!!!

Bobbie, I'm beginning to think the "PE" in your sig stands for penial extremist! Just how dense are you?!?

The "problem" isn't "buried" , BOB! ....folk-cuss...... F-O-C-U-S!

The "problem" (one which only affected 1 or 2 individuals) has been FIXED! It took all of 7 seconds, for gawdsake!!!

I had to re-post because I'm not the sysop!

I really need to run now, thanks for a look at how damaged logic works!

very enlightening!

-- Y2K is over (time@to.move.on), July 14, 1999.

To the unnamed sysop who tried to fix it: nope, the columns are still broken. But there are now only one column, translated to the right, rather than 3 columns, one after the other.

So whatever you tried partially worked.

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 14, 1999.

And finally, like all real y2k-induced failures, the problem can be solved: given enough time, by the right worker - not administrator who merely "claims" to have "a fix" available, but who does not install it, test it, nor put it into real world use - and enough support from "management" to actually get the job done.

The potential world-wide failures now becoming more likely - as time grows shorter - could have all been prevented also. Most ironically, it could have been prevented by the same government now actively trying to conceal their failures by false announcements of the success of too-limited tests, improper, politically-motivated schedules, and by premature declarations of success everytime a solution is found - rather thatn when it is finially implemented.

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 15, 1999.