Now that we're past another "critical" date (GPS rollover), I thought I would get some dialogue going on the next "critical" date. Now, I've read all the previous debate about 9/9/99, so I do understand that this date may also turn out to be no big deal, that computers actually read it as 09/09/99, or something to that effect. I guess what I'm wondering is, if this does turn out to be problematic, and since (as I understand it) this would only effect the old mainframes, could we see this problem manifest in a bigger way overseas? My impression is that here in the US we don't use as many of those big old mainframes, but my hunch is that many foreign countries still rely on them. Since I know nearly nothing about this stuff, I'm looking forward to what you people who do have to say. Thanks.

-- Curious (Guy@Ohio.com), August 23, 1999

Answers

The doomers have backed off the 9/9/99 thing as you can imagine so its not going to be a problem. It was a problem a year ago, but now nobody on earth claims they ever said it was.

I wish Tempest would chime in with what we should do to prepare.

-- Author. (program-id@identification.division), August 23, 1999.

As a software hack, I can say that 09/09/99 is a non-event. Dates are in the wrong location and wrong foremat for programs to relate to. They will need specific pointers to a code location with "9999" as the "end of program". Nothing will happen here so I guess we'll have to wait for 01/01/2000...

Regards

-- Uncle Bob (UNCLB0B@Y2KOK.ORG), August 23, 1999.

RE: "foremat"...for all of the frustrated grammar and spelling teachers, it is "format".

Sorry

-- Uncle Bob (UNCLB0B@Y2KOK.ORG), August 23, 1999.

Oh no, here we go again. So many of theese so called "indicator" or "critical" date's are speculated upon, that it distracts attention from the issue in the first place. It's called the y2k problem for a reason. Y2k is the only date you should have any concern about IMO.

As 9-9-99 comes and goes so will the pluthera of so called polly's touting the "na na na na boo boo" line. Neither the doom's(me) or the pol's can claim sh*t untill AFTER 1-1-00, gloating or lamenting SIGNIFICANT failures or lack thereof BEFORE 1-1-00 is a practice of pissing in the wind.

-- CygnusXI (noburnt@toast.net), August 23, 1999.

Suggestion: Why don't the Pollys start up their own Y1.999K forum and leave this one alone? More specifically, how about a Y1.99969041K forum for September 9th? There may be a handful of Doomers who would post on that forum out of ignorance, but I don't think they will be missed.

Here's a small Polly-nomial mathematics lesson:

Y==Year 2==2 K==1000 2*1000=2000 1999<>2000

Got it?

-- Y2KGardener (gardens@bigisland.net), August 23, 1999.

Sorry Cygnus, you dont seem to get it. The "doomers" are noting every little thing that goes wrong and are saying "See this is what it will be like when Y2k comes" or some place isnt fully compliant and they say "See nobody is fully compliant, how many other places like company X arent ready".

But when the "pollies" say all of the other dates should have produced events similiar to Y2k the "doomers" say "No, its just Y2k, you cant compare the other dates".

All the Y2k-like dates that passed with no major problems show that companies are fixing their year 2000 related problems. Banks are working well with 1/1/2000, credit cards process fine, mortgages and other "look ahead" accounting is working fine. All the dates including the GPS rollover show that they can fix it no matter how "systemic" it might appear (even though GPS is not 1/1/2000 related it is date related AND "systemic").

So the fact the other dates end up doing ok IS IMPORTANT when comparing them to Y2k.

Doomers dont want to hear that because it rips apart their arguments that we cannot fix it.

-- Fat Tony (FatTony@youmammashouse.com), August 23, 1999.

Sept 9 was picked as the next date for the utility tests ....that way if it is a success,,,,everybody will continue to say y2k will be a non-event.....

If there are electrical failures,,,it will be blamed on the 9/9/99 date and said that it had nothing to do with y2k, and was just a fluke of 9/9/99.....

-- mmmm (mmmm@aol.com), August 23, 1999.

How is GPS "systemic"?

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), August 23, 1999.

mmmm,

I think your take on the 9/9/99 situation is right on target. It should also be pointed out that 9/9/99, like GPS, is not a subset of the "99" and "00" problem that we usually call "Y2K". Both the GPS rollover and 9/9/99 are unique kinds of glitches. Like it was with the GPS rollover, little analysis is available about the possible extent of problems on 9/9/99.

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), August 23, 1999.

Just watch: In the next few weeks, you will see a sudden rash of "doomer" posts suddenly appear warning that the world will end because of 9/9/99. Then, when that date passes, it will be a rash of polly posts saying, "See, nothing much happened, just like Y2K will be."

We are on to you, Fat Tony et al. ("Fat Tony" = "Buddy" = Doomslayer" ?)

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), August 23, 1999.

Lane Core:

May I have a little fun with your question?

GPS is systemic because:

When GPS fails, the boat carrying oil, short-shorts, computer parts, automobile parts, etc. will hit the rocks, or find itself in Cuba when it should have been in [pick a place]. The folks in [pick a place] will be unable to sell short-shorts, computers, automobiles, refined gasoline, etc. The natives of [pick a place] will suffer job loss, transportation difficulties, increases in price of short-shorts or [pick another scenario.]

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), August 23, 1999.

Since I've been on this forum, 9/9/99 has never been a problem.

Idiotic pollys can say what they want about smart doomers who did their research, the proof is in the archives as early as Jan. '98:

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), August 23, 1999.

oops

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), August 23, 1999.

GPS is systemic in the same way Y2k is. Anita is sort of right in a cute way. GPS is used by many systems worldwide and other services in the world are interdependant on the others to be working correctly. If the GPS system (even just for timing info) were not fixed either in the user equipment or in the satellite and sat support equiptment the "system" would fail due to the high dependency of GPS for so much of the world economies engines of commerce.

-- Fat Tony (FatTony@youmammashouse.com), August 23, 1999.

Thanks, Anita. That makes sense. I think, however, that Y2K is systemic in a different sense: the two-digit year is ubiquitous in computer systems of many different kinds all over the world. IOW, you are talking about a systemic effect, whereas I was thinking of a systemic problem.

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), August 23, 1999.

Lane:

I understand what you're saying, except I haven't seen it done in practice. When computer A "talks" to computer B, the "dialogue" is agreed upon before-hand. It's very similar to an LU 6.2 application on a System 360/370/390 "talking" to an AS-400 or another type of machine. The date format is agreed upon before remediation is even begun.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), August 23, 1999.