Subject:	Re: The Lying Two-faced ASSHOLE de Jager
Date:	1999/08/18
Author:	cory hamasaki <kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net>
	Posting History

On Wed, 18 Aug 1999 00:38:21, "Paul Milne" <fedinfo@halifax.com> wrote:   > Global Y2k Fears Mount Some Nations' Computers Not Ready, Experts Say > > The Hartford Courant > > >  Less than five months before the calendar changes to 2000, experts are > increasingly worried that many foreign countries are losing the race to > ready their computers for the Y2K bug. > > Interviews with government and private experts suggest that significant > sectors of the world community are still scrambling to ensure vital computer > systems won't fall victim to the year 2000 problem.     -stuff about foreign efforts-   Although foreign efforts are significantly less than the U.S., the problem is here.  The U.S. is powered by computers, more so than other countries.  We have more lines of code, we have large applications systems.  When we fail, it is our economy that suffers first.   According to the ABA (The American Bankers Association, report released yesterday), Chase just raised their Y2K estimate by 31 million to total of 363 million, of which 158 million are 1999 expenses. Citigroup raised their estimate by 50 million to a grand total of 950 million.   The Wall Street Journal reports that several companies are suing their Insurance companies for re-embursement for their Y2K expenses.  Their justification?  By repairing the software ahead of time, they're saving the insurance company from covering damages (I guess plant explosions or something like that) which will be several times more costly than the repairs. Nice try, the kind of convoluted reasoning that the Polly-brigade engages in.   "Y2K won't be bad because.  So there."   For you people who are undecided, Banks are terrified.  The ABA says that Citigroup spent almost a billion dollars fixing something and the article didn't say that they were done.  Since this is T minus 135 days including weekends, holidays, sick days, and uh-oh, maybe a project manager will be up on charges of exposing himself or will decide to take early retirement, you gotta wonder how Citigroup expects to slam the last brick into place juuuust in time.   How did they do it?   How did every other bank in the world manage to time things so that their last brick slams into place juuuuust in time?  And what's really odd is that they started at different times.  They expended different amounts of effort.  Some claim to have spent less than fifty million bucks. Chase says 363 million, Citigroup is on record at 950 million.   It's like a turtle, a panther, and a meat bee are in a race to Boston, one starts in Florida, another in Kansas, and the third from Alabama. Somehow they all end up at the finish line within moments of each other?   I'm as gullible as the next person but come-on, someone is faking the results.   Citigroup spends 950 million bucks doing something and like magic, every other bank, S&L, donut bakery, striptease joint, titanium smelter in the country completes the same project at the same time but using less money?  How does this work?   Then we have Kosky saying, Yo No Problems.    Come on.  This is too weird. Let's apply a simple rule,  the simple explanation explains it.   Maybe the simpliest explanation is that they think they're done but they're not?  Has this ever happened?   Why yes, in fact Joel Willemssen and the GAO has nabbed several organizations falsifying compliance reports and other fakery.   So here's the deal.  The GAO has nabbed organizations faking Y2K compliance.  Let's be kind, they thought they were done.  It was a clerical error.  They were overcome by enthusiasm.   In the private sector, there's a wide variation in cost, effort, time to reach compliance.  Maybe the private sector is faking too.  Maybe no one is going to make it?   (Well, I do know of a few organizations that are compliant but I'm not saying who they are.  I know the quality of their staff and don't believe  that organizations in general have done as much work.)   Based on the GAO's reports of fakery, the wide variation in effort, cost, and the strangely coincidental completions and successes, I conclude that the work failed about a year ago.  Since then, most of the effort has been applied to spin doctoring, perception engineering, and contingencies.   But it's a mixed bag, I have credible reports of companies pressing hard, the additional 50 million at Citigroup is a good sign.  I also have credible reports of companies that are going fix-on-failure as a corporate policy.   In general, we'll see all sorts of odd failures.  Maybe like the CBOE last week when their Frame Relay service failed and their power went out. Can you imagine the SCREAMING at the CBOE?  No wonder the mayor is mad at the power company.   The multiple failures will affect everyone.  We'll all share the pain.     -referring to de Jager- > But now, now that you are going to be responsible for the death of > inumerable masses of people , I wonder how you can live with yourself? > > http://cnnfntech.newsreal.com/story/19990817/01/11/5417107_st.html > Paul Milne   Well, almost everyone.  Paul will be tending his vegetable garden, chickens, cows, fruit trees, tossing a log on his wood stove.  I gotta tell you, visiting him was like stepping into a "Mother Earth News" article.  The only thing that was missing was the windmill.   cory hamasaki http://www.kiyoinc.com/current.html 

-- a (a@a.a), August 19, 1999

Answers

you got=snap cory, check-out what the LORD said, about polly word,s from=bible=''when they say PEACE & SAFETY=then comes sudden destruction''

-- bye,bye=false prophet,s (dogs@zianet.com), August 19, 1999.

A telling clue is that banks are now saying "we took care of Y2K years ago" (see ABA sermon template). Well, if so, why the hell are the largest banks still spending billions? I called my bank to correct an error, asked about y2k and was given a canned spiel on "we took care of y2k years ago". After they had poo-pooed my y2k concerns, they then tried to sell me mutual funds.

-- a (a@a.a), August 19, 1999.

About the beginning of this year, I downgraded my personal expectations of "completion" to maybe 40% to 60% of the FORTUNE 1000. The big boys (ok, and girls).

I'm no geek. But, I am a champion procrastinator. Folks, they make me feel like a piker. A rank amatuer.

I don't know what's going to happen, but I like Paul's approach, even though I know he personally irritates heck out of people.

If you are no better a "farmer" than I am, two years of food ain't a bad idea. That is what the Royal Canadian Mounted Police required for prospectors coming in for the big Klondike gold rush.

-- Jon Williamson (jwilliamson003@sprintmail.com), August 19, 1999.

Cory,

Ya know it's bad when the Money Changers dictate the Sermon to the High Priest. I have a bad feeling about this...never forget what they did to the Person who drove them out!

-- K. Stevens (kstevens@It's ALL going away in January.com), August 19, 1999.

And just a click away, we have the following assessment by a Mr. Vecchio. Sure, now that more people are paying attention to the problem.

Despite fears about international preparedness, analysts at Stamford-based Gartner Group say they are guardedly optimistic about the international progress on Y2K.

But Dale Vecchio, a Gartner Group research director, cautions that most of the assessments of Y2K progress are self-reported by corporations and governments.

"We have seen in the first half of 1999 some tremendous reported progress in almost all industries and all geographies . . . and frankly, we're a bit skeptical about it," Vecchio said.

-- nothere nothere (notherethere@hotmail.com), August 19, 1999.

Cory, what is a "meat bee"? A yellow jacket wasp (genus Vespula)?

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), August 19, 1999.

Yeah, Cory, what is a meat bee? Is that another one of those weird things you find in Hawaii, like potato donuts?

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), August 19, 1999.