Drudge picks up link to Lord story

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Has prominent link to Washington Post article.

Looks like it's out of the bag.

-- Ron Schwarz (rs@clubvb.com.delete.this), August 19, 1999


NY Times ran it in their Breaking News online column around 7 pm, and then it disappeared, replaced by another AP story on GPS/y2k.

-- PH (ag3@interlog.com), August 19, 1999.


-- PH (ag3@interlog.com), August 19, 1999.


This and the above URL are the two AP/NY Times stories mentioned above.

-- PH (ag3@interlog.com), August 19, 1999.

When I go to the NYTimes AP breaking news section, I get a server error.

Man, the Net is so weird today! My ISP was down for 5 hours because their upstream provider, GTE had a problem...

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), August 19, 1999.

Uh pshannon... early GPS symptoms?

Think I recall reading something on one of the many GPS threads that said they'd start thursday.

Another interesting little snippet from an article Linkmeister found...

Paris, Tuesday, August 17, 1999
The Internet May Be the Biggest Question Mark of Them All
By Thomas Fuller International Herald Tribune

http:/ / www.iht.com/IHT/TODAY/TUE/FPAGE/netbug.2.html


Internet users may get a foretaste of Y2K confusion on Aug. 24, when, for reasons not directly related to the millennium bug, the clocks in some satellites that carry Internet traffic will reset themselves to zero. That could affect the way computers linked to the Internet register such things as financial transactions.


Oh joy!


-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), August 19, 1999.

Linked From The Drudge Report


Navy Predicts Widespread Y2K Failure

By Ted Bridis
Associated Press Writer
Thursday, August 19, 1999; 7:27 p.m. EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Navy report predicts ``probable'' or ``likely'' failures in electrical and water systems for many cities because of the Year 2000 technology problem -- an assessment more dire than any other made by the government.

President Clinton's top Y2K adviser, John Koskinen, called the Navy's conclusions overly cautious, saying they assumed that major utilities would fail unless proved otherwise.

The most recent version of the study, updated less than two weeks ago, predicted ``probable'' or ``likely'' partial failures in electric utilities that serve nearly 60 of roughly 400 Navy and Marine Corps facilities.

The study predicted ``likely'' partial electrical failures, for example, at facilities in Orlando, Fla.; Gulfport, Miss.; Fort Lauderdale, Fla.; and nine other small- to mid-size cities.

It also predicted ``probable'' partial water system failures in Dallas; Nashville, Tenn.; Houston; Baton Rouge, La.; Montgomery, Ala; Tulsa, Okla.; and 59 other cities.

The study forecast likely partial natural gas failures -- in the middle of winter -- in Albany, N.Y.; Fort Worth, Texas; Pensacola, Fla.; Charleston, S.C.; Columbus, Ohio; and Nashville.

The military report contrasts sharply with predictions from the White House, which weeks ago said in a report that national electrical failures are ``highly unlikely.'' The White House report also said disruptions in water service from the date rollover are ``increasingly unlikely.''

Koskinen, who vouched for the authenticity of the Navy report, noted that all its worst-case predictions for failures were marked as ``interim'' or ``partial'' assessments.

``It's not nearly as interesting as the world coming to an end,'' said Koskinen. ``The way they worked was, until you have information for contingency planning purposes, you ought to assume there was a problem.''

The Year 2000 problem occurs because some computer programs, especially older ones, might fail when the date changes to 2000. Because the programs were written to recognize only the last two digits of a year, such programs could read the digits ``00'' as 1900 instead of 2000, potentially causing problems with financial transactions, airline schedules and electrical grids.

The Navy report was first summarized on an Internet site run by Jim Lord, a Y2K author, who said he obtained it ``from a confidential source of the highest reliability and integrity.''

``The military has to work from the worst case, but so do we,'' Lord told The Associated Press on Thursday. ``It's reprehensible for them to know this and keep it from us.''

Koskinen said the Navy wasn't withholding information from anyone, noting that the continually updated report was available until recently on a Web site maintained by the Defense Department.

``The last people in the world the department is going to keep information from is their own people,'' Koskinen said. ``In fact, the whole purpose of the exercise is to make sure they can provide appropriate information to servicemen on their bases and their families.

The report was pulled off the Web site two weeks, Koskinen said. Neither he nor Defense Department officials offered any reason why.

-- flb (fben4077@yahoo.com), August 19, 1999.

The link from the New York Times URL given above works for me. It's the same article as on the Washington Post and Drudge report.

It's spreading like wild fire.

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), August 19, 1999.

I picked up the Navy story at 2:00pm PDT at NEWSMAX.COM...Pretty good source from Chris Ruddy. Pshannon, you are doing a great job.

-- Uncle Bob (UNCLB0B@Y2KOK.ORG), August 19, 1999.

FWIW, just heard the story on the local radio via AP Network News. This station only airs the topmost stories. The broadcast reported this as the Navy's take on Y2k and then pointed out the glaring consistency with the previous White House version.

-- Nathan (nospam@all.com), August 20, 1999.

Make that "glaring inconsistency".

-- Nathan (nospam@all.com), August 20, 1999.

The alert is out. Get your preps finished FAST, folks! And let's hope this serves to save some more lives...

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), August 20, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ