Subject:	Re: SSA
Date:	1999/08/11
Author:	cory hamasaki <kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net>
	Posting History

On Wed, 11 Aug 1999 05:27:08, dtmiller@nevia.net (Dean T. Miller) wrote:   > Hi All, > > I haven't noticed this GAO report in the newsgroup. > > From:  http://www.gao.gov/new.items/ai99259t.pdf > > "Finally, SSA must correct a number of date-field errors recently > identified using its QA tool. SSA reported that as of July 23, 1999, > it had assessed 92 percent (283 of 308) of its mission-critical > applications (having a total of about 40 million lines of code), and > that it had identified 1,565 date field errors. SSA is in the process > of correcting these identified date problems. As of mid-July, it > reported that 44 of the 283 applications had been corrected, > recertified, and returned to production." > > Hmm.  I thought SSA was done. > > -- Dean T. Miller, CDP   No, they are not done.  I've reported "geekvine info" from SSA insiders that they are still working hard on Y2K.   We've gone over this before.  SSA, like the Fortune 50 best-of-the-best, has a fighting chance but they will have problems.  That's why the best-of-the-best are building war-rooms, planning their contingencies which include huge generators, stored food, cash on hand, 4WD vehicles.   The contingency plans for the best-of-the-best exceed Tim May and Paul Milne by a wide margin.  Of course they have more mouths to feed, larger perimeters to secure, bigger facilities to power but it is instructive that they are doing what our broomie pals froth and whine about individuals contemplating.   One Fortune 50 corp has arranged charter jets to evacuate their overseas personnel, *if* needed.  No one here, even Rawles' novel, discusses similar efforts.   The real problem is the next two tiers down, the Fortune 450,  big but not the best-of-the-best, and the Fortune 49,500, the larger than small enterprises that everyone seems to have forgotten.   Get with it people, I'm not picking on you, Dean, I'm telling the others.  Look at the actions, don't listen to their press releases.   cory hamasaki http://www.kiyoinc.com/current.html 

-- a (a@a.a), August 11, 1999

Answers

This is true. I have several reliable accounts of significant personal preparations being made by some CEOs of big corporations who are officially "Y2K smiles", but fear they may be out of business by March.

-- Dog Gone (layinglow@rollover.now), August 11, 1999.

Dog:

Details, please?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), August 11, 1999.

Sorry, Flint

I know the predictable attacks that will follow, but the specifics of what and how I know would break confidences I've made. The CEO's and CIO's would not be happy.

One is a health care equipment supply company. One is a northeastern bank. One is a midwest utility company. Feel free to discount it, because I will not provide further details.

-- Dog Gone (layinglow@rollover.now), August 11, 1999.

SSA was claiming that "Mission Critical" systems were remediated. Now for the rest of the news...

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), August 11, 1999.

What doesn't compute for me is.....how people can read Cory's comments like the one above and think he's lying. Doesn't his credibility and honesty come through at all? Doesn't he have 'the ring of truth'?

What do people think......that Cory sits up all night eating chocolate chip cookie dough and making this all up for a fringe forum?......... Well, maybe the first part.....

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), August 12, 1999.

Amen and amen. It's too late for the admin to be honest about ANY industry not being ready.

My tack is to listen for some reporter to tell me that a particular agency is feared to be on a hacking list - the ATC and IRS have been mentioned.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), August 12, 1999.

Definitely the first part, but I refuse to divulge my source, so feel free to discount it.

Look, Cory is a mainframe guy and *nearly* all the mainframe guys hear that ring of truth. Everything he says computes for us. But he's trying to talk to PC types, too, and they just don't have the frame of reference. So their buy-in is lower, not because they're stupid but because they have a bigger load of preconceptions and experience to get past. That makes the public relations junk a little more believable for them. And he's talking to civilians, who hear conflicting stuff from a number of sources. Their frame of reference is totally unlike a geek's. No wonder that they think he's nuts, eating too much cookie dough and wigging out.

I don't actually see a lot of stupid people in these discussions, but I see people trying to make sense of conflicting stories. That's the difference between this and the newspapers/TV, which is the mainstream diet. You have to work at figuring this stuff out.

-- bw (home@puget.sound), August 12, 1999.

Thanks for the sane howbeit hi-calorie post bw.

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), August 12, 1999.