San Diego U-T: Y2K Dominates Sunday Op-Ed Sectiongreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread |
Well, first we had that lovely little missive in last week's U-T from one Steve Oualline telling us all to "Don't Worry, Be Happy" about Y2K. Now this Sunday's Insight (Op-Ed) section has two, count 'em, TWO lengthy columns on Y2K, plus a big ol' banner headline intoning "The Apocalypse and Y2K".Column A was by Mr. Steve Woodward of the Portland Oregonian: Only a test of technology, or a challenge for society Frankly, I felt like I'd read most of this piece before. Richard Landes is quoted about "roosters" and "owls". The Year 1000 is described. Local pastors are interviewed. Y2K has "believers" and "atheists", etc. *sigh*
Column B was by Mr. Howard Belasco (with whom visitors to the c.s.y2k newsgroup will no doubt be quite familiar): Minor problems are likely but major systems will function What's interesting here is that Mr. Belasco seems to start out saying "Nothin' big gonna happen", but by the time he's finished, he's recommended two-to-four weeks of preps and a visit to Susan "Connery's" (yes, he did misspell her name) survival skills Website. Not sure what to make of it.
Suffice it to say that the majority of readers will probably glance at the titles and the really cool "4 Horsemen of the Digital Apocalypse" graphic and just head over to Sports to see how many hits Tony got against Montreal.
Hey, Ashton and Leska, if you know Steve Woodward, tell him to work on more original material next time. That column had "rehash" written all over it. Didn't he cover the Trailblazers a while back? 8-}]
-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), August 08, 1999
Hi Mac, yes we know Steve Woodward. He is a DGI. He is the reporter for Y2K in the Portland area, although other reporters write some Oregonian articles. Mr. Woodward is not a bad man, but he is a Yes man with a cozy kissy relationship with the Portland powers-that-be. He is the reporter who agreed very readily, complicitly, with Mayor Katz that NO news of any disruptions would be allowed out to the public.Mr. Woodward has eMailed us a couple times, after we tried to clue him in with heavy-hitting Forum threads; but is not truly interested in Y2K and certainly not the TRUTH underneath all the snoozy hob-nobbing and self-interested "We've got it under control, now you just run along" superficial uninformed meetings the politically brown-nosed attend.
Time speeds along, and soon Will Tell. We'll be happy if we're proved to be kooky extremists by advocating @ 3 months of preparation. If we are wrong in our now-8.5 trepidation, it will be because we have observed for too long an accelerating downward spiral of man's character and moral fiber, and that sadness has darkened our outlook.
@}->-- 3~0 3~0 3~0 3~0 3~0 3~0 3~0 @}->-- 3~0
-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), August 08, 1999.
Just to clarify, to us an 8.5 calls for the Yourdon + Milne approach: bugging out to the countryside, off the grid, self-reliant, with provisions and skills to make it through a 10-year recovery (at least). The 3 months prep advocation was our public recommendation which was thought way too extreme. Ha! Obviously none of them have even lurked here ;^)
-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), August 08, 1999.
Reading the article, we were struck by how typical an introduction it is for a Sunday newspaper exploring an issue whose outcome is up for grabs. The timing of Y2K, while making for some very interesting threads with peripheral musing, is unfortunate in that too much attention is diverted into superstition and religion scoffing. Y2K must be presented in its sterile mathematical reality for newbies to start to get a grasp. Otherwise, it's just another mote in the eyes of the crazed.
-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), August 08, 1999.
After re-reading, I was struck even more by how "schizophrenic" Mr. Belasco's article seemed. The first four paragraphs say "All's well, not to worry, all the important systems will be fine." Then he tells a few "war stories" about computer glitches and how they got worked around. Then we get the "survivalist" info (?!), and by the time he's finished, he's saying:...Everyone's experiences will be different and everyone's needs will be different. Do not hesitate to follow your beliefs and feelings for your comfort zone.
And if you feel the necessity for it, do not hesitate to execute your plans now.
This is very odd. He's always seemed a dyed-in-the-wool, nothing-worse-than-a-2-or-3 optimist up to now. Am I misinterpreting this article in some way?
-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), August 09, 1999.