Do all the Doomers still fear a massive calamity? Any Doomer willing to drop the Doomer Dogma and accept reality?

Y2k is completely a game. A frivolous hobby which will make a good trivia question in 10-20 years. You may want to keep any Y2k hysteria merchandise you may have purchased, it may be a odd collector's item in a couple of decades.

-- You Knowwho (debunk@doomeridiots.com), November 05, 1999

Answers

Any pollies changing sides?

-- (gotany@spare.change), November 05, 1999.

Foe many Doomers, Y2K isn't a game - it's a religion. A faith that they fervently clasp to their chests like a talisman of hate. the only thing their missing is their own Jim Jones... Who's got the koolaid?

Think I'm wrong? As one of their believers once said:

"People who want to survive Y2K should be prepared to kill."

(its@coming.soon), July 27, 1999.

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro@hotmail.com), November 05, 1999.

Why do you care so very much about how those of us who feel differently than you do? If we are wrong you have the self satisfaction of standing in your own bully pulpit and shouting, "hahahahaha"...

But if you are wrong, then what? What motivates you pollies to come here in the first place? Why do you try so very hard to dissuade us? Are you really that insecure? Your remarks have proved your point, to you it really is all a game...more's the pity.

Regardless of how this pans out, I have learned so much about bargain hunting, shopping carefully, budgeting, what I REALLY need, and so very much more. I have found others who have learned the same lessons. Regardless of how this turns out, I have new life skills. Now what do you have? Not much it would seem....You are a very sad person. Find something useful to do with your time. Take up a productive hobby. Poor thing.

-- Ynott (Ynott@incorruptible.com), November 05, 1999.

Not a chance in changing. How can you take the chance. If anything, I will be adding in any loose ends (in terms of preps) over the next 2 weeks.

-- thomas saul (thomas.saul@yale.edu), November 05, 1999.

This question was asked by you last week "You Know Who." Didn't you get the answers you were looking for? I think you have a very short memory.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), November 05, 1999.

Reality isn't here yet - we still don't know how much of an impact Y2K will have. I'm very comfortable with my preps, and will use them regardless of what happens.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), November 05, 1999.

Pollies are idiots, and their head idiot is Y2K Pro. That's about as succinct as I can put it...

DOWNtheROAD

-- DOWNtheROAD (pollys@are.idiots), November 05, 1999.

Telling myself that y2k is a big nothing has made the last two months bearable for me. I'll go on doing that, & finishing my preps at the same time.

It's all in God's hands, whatever happens. Do any pollys believe that?

-- better (safe@than.sorry), November 05, 1999.

Get back under your bridge, Smeckley.

But *do* let us know if any *trolls* "change sides", eh?

-- Ron Schwarz (rs@clubvb.com.delete.this), November 05, 1999.

wow, y2k pro. i didn't know we had to kill? bummer. i may have to change sides. and personally, youknowwho, i am sick of thinking about y2k. i am a doomer but if nothing happens, i don't have to go to the grocery store for a while and i am going on the best vacation you have ever seen!!! paaaaarrrrty.

-- tt (cuddluppy@yahoo.com), November 05, 1999.

I've already used a lot of my preps and the rest are cheap insurance as far as I'm concerned. I've learned many interesting things here. Even if Y2k is a bust, we are going to come back and keep talking anyway because we have made lots of friends. You, on the other hand, will have to find someone else to pick on.

-- Amy Leone (leoneamy@aol.com), November 05, 1999.

Nobody gives a flying f*** what you pollies post anyway. Life is to short, quit wasteing your time. The gene pool will be cleansed soon enough.

-- FLAMEAWAY (blehman202@aol.com), November 05, 1999.

You Know Who:

Not only have I "not" changed my preparedness attitude, but within the last month, my son, my daughter, and my neighbor have begun to prepare. I do not believe that they are doing this on "my sayso" but rather it makes sense to prepare for the unknown. I do not preach Y2K; I simply state the risks for "not" preparing. Common sense would seem to dictate some preparation; afterall, we are facing an "unknown" (even the experts agree on that). Do you know what is the differnce between "knowledge" and "wisdom"? A wise person "acts" on their knowledge. Be wise and hedge your bets. It just makes sense.

Morrighan

-- Morrighan (matotipi@worldpath.net), November 05, 1999.

I pray that anyone who has prepared DOES not deplete their stock too early--I am not psychic but feel that we are going to have a lot of earth changes coming in the next few years. We might not need are preps for y2k (comp. failure) but we might need them for natural disasters in the next few years. Just my thoughts. Thank you.

-- Curly~Q (Curly@Q.COM), November 05, 1999.

(Echoes loudly in cyberspace)

NO!

-- Debi (LongTimeLurker@shy.com), November 05, 1999.

Polly Dipshit:

Prove it's a game. No facts, eh? Why should we accept your 'factless' reality? For the record, I hope you're right.

-- X (X@X.com), November 05, 1999.

Think I'm wrong? As one of their believers once said:

"People who want to survive Y2K should be prepared to kill."

I think we should pass hate-crimes legislation against "doomers". Larry & Curley think so too!

-- moe (moe@3stooges.vr), November 05, 1999.

Gotta concur that I see more doomers of late. Could be a run on tinfoil real fast. Glad I bought a case. (Real useful stuff and it lasts for a very, very long time.) When the hell is the pre-game show gonna be over? Pass the "chips". I'll break out the "bean" dip once the game starts. (As we approach Christmas, I get more and more like a fruitcake.)

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), November 05, 1999.

It took me a week or so of pondering about the motivations behind this.

to all the POLLIIES: ECON 101

The FALLACY OF COMPOSITION

The fallacy of composition can be summarized as: What is good (or bad) for one is necessarily good (or bad) for all.

-begone oh polly fool!

-- karla (karlacalif@aol.com), November 05, 1999.

No, yes, no...

And you sir/madam are a dumba$$, IMHO of course...

growlin' at the parrot...

The Dog

-- The Dog (DesertDog@-sand.com), November 05, 1999.

Nope. Why should I change now? With less than two months to go, it ain't that hard to just stay the course and see what happens. It would be foolishness to change now after a year or so of preps. Why take the chance, especially since there is no across the board, compelling news that all is well. I don't expect any pollys to change for the same reason. We've all climbed the steps to the porch, knocked on the door and are now awaiting an answer. Why should we run as the door is opened? I'll stay my course, you stay yours. Why are you so bedeviled by "doomers" and their stances? You pollys will win regadless of what happens, anyway. If there is no widespread disruption, catastrophe, recession, you'll be here to crow, albeit to an empty auditorium. If there are serious problems, you won't show up (if there's a net to show up on) and take your lumps, as evidenced by your use of anonymity. So have fun with your baiting and trolling. I know most of us "doomers" really couldn't care less what you think, our taking the time to answer you notwithstanding.

-- Kurt Ayau (Ayau@iwinet.com), November 05, 1999.

Hey Pro, you said:

A faith that they fervently clasp to their chests like a talisman of hate. the [sic] only thing their [sic] missing is their own Jim Jones...

But over at DeBunkie's, you guys do EXACTLY that. And you even have a "Jim Jones". His name is Charles P. Reuben, aka CPR. If EVER there was a DeBunkie cult leader, HE is definitely IT!

So dude, be careful about blanket staements....

(And, um, spelling is a GOOD thing)

-- Dennis (djolson@cherco.net), November 05, 1999.

"As he crouched in the darkness, a slight breeze sent chills up his back. He had been successful, for the moment. Long and loud did the painful echos ring in his head. The screams of the final agony of his children's last breath. 'At least I'm alive...' he thought for but a moment. Gone were the days of the gloriously lit markets, filled to overflowing with food and consumables. He knew the hunters were close...Those who would hold him responsible...He attempted to rationalize his mistaken beliefs...'But they said nothing would happen!!!' he insanely muttered to himself, as he dragged himself over the ground. The sounds of the far off hounds increased. The dogs would not be denied. They had his spoor. Y2K Pro took one last look around, and quietly, quickly, scurried off into the darkness..."

-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan@Yahoo.com), November 05, 1999.

9 MILLION rounds ( .223, ONE dealer, ONE day in Midwest)

Stuff THAT in your "doomeridiots" type brain.

-- Z (Z@Z.Z), November 05, 1999.

Nothing has changed to indicate widespread problem will be avoided.

Nobody has ever presented any evidence that enough problems have been found and elimnated to avoid very significant troubles - worldwide, nationally, and locally in most regions of the US.

Or do you have any new evidence that any national system other than banking and limited sections of the stock market in one nation has been tested? That any international systems have been thoroughly tested?

Do you have any evidence that social unrest will not occur due to these problems?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), November 05, 1999.

By the way, do you have any evidence from any uninterested, independent parties that enough year 2000 problems affecting government have been fixed to avoid massive disruptions in that section of the economy?

Actually, do you have any evidence from ANY independent parties ANYWHERE that enough problems have been found, eliminated, and re-installed worldwide to avoid massive disruptions affecting the economy?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), November 05, 1999.

My sense of doom has increased with the oil industry information which seems pretty accurate. I think it mighht be a 10.

-- Mara (MaraWayne@aol.com), November 05, 1999.

Dennis: Spelling flames? You must be desperate...

Billy Boy: You're not the first person to wish death upon me simply because I do not subscribe to your religion of despair, nor do I suspect you will be the last. I will however, take special pleasure next year in rubbing your nose in this particular Tinfoil effluence...

"So, of course I want to see y2k bring down the system, all over the world. I have hoped for this all of my adult life." -- Gary North

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), November 05, 1999.

(with apologies to David Crosby...)

Almost ...quit my preps happened ..just the other day gettin' ..kind of old Could I take a chance on Y2K?

But I didn't And I wonder why...?

I feel like everyone should try Yes, I feel...

like I should try....

-- eubie (eubie@dejavu.com), November 05, 1999.

The real question is whether these folks have changed their mind.

http://www.senate.gov/~y2k/hearings/990305/gershwin.htm

Opening Statement

Lawrence K. Gershwin

National Intelligence Officer

For Science and Technology,

National Intelligence Council

Mr. Chairman,

I am pleased to be able to discuss with you today the understanding that the Intelligence Community has about foreign efforts to deal with the Y2K problem. We continue to watch the problem closely, and I have our current assessment of where we see problems as most likely to occur. The Y2K situation continues to change, and our assessments will similarly evolve as more information becomes available, as countries become more aware of and deal with Y2K issues, and as incidents of Y2K failure increase.

As we have said before, Mr. Chairman, all countries will be affected-- to one degree or another--by Y2K-related failures. Global linkages in telecommunications, financial systems, air transportation, the manufacturing supply chain, oil supplies, and trade will virtually guarantee that Y2K problems will not be isolated to individual countries. No country will be completely immune from failures. Fixing the Y2K problem has proven to be labor and time intensive, as well as expensive.

There remain significant information gaps that make it difficult for us to assess how serious the Y2K problem will be around the world. In many cases, foreign countries only recently have become aware of the problem and begun to examine their critical infrastructure systems for potential Y2K failures. In comparison, the United States has made a significant effort to identify and redress Y2K problems, and it was only after the process was well underway that it was possible to get a good appreciation of the extent of the problem and its implications. Many foreign countries, particularly those that are the furthest behind, have not made such an effort, so--for our part--we can identify their likely problem areas but cannot make confident judgments at this point about what is likely to happen. Those problem areas that we have detected that have the potential to affect US interests include, among others, foreign nuclear reactors and power grids, military early warning systems, trade, the oil and gas sectors , and worldwide shipping and air transport, all of which I will elaborate on.

The consequences of Y2K failures abroad will range from the relatively benign, to problems within systems across sectors that will have humanitarian implications such as power loss in mid-winter. The coincidence of widespread Y2K-related failures in the winter of 1999-2000 in Russia and Ukraine, with continuing economic problems, food shortages, and already difficult conditions for the population could have major humanitarian consequences for these countries.

Foreign countries trail the United States in addressing Y2K problems by at least several months, and in many cases much longer. Y2K remediation is underfunded in most countries. We do see indications that countries are undertaking contingency planning for recovery from Y2K failures:

Time and resource constraints will limit the ability of most countries to respond adequately by 2000.

Governments in many countries have begun to plan seriously for Y2K remediation only within the last year, some only in the last few months, and some continue to significantly underestimate the cost and time requirements for remediation and, importantly, testing. Because many countries are way behind, testing of fixes will come late, and unanticipated problems typically arise in this phase.

The largest institutions, particularly those in the financial sectors, are the most advanced in Y2K remediation. Small and medium- size entities trail in every sector worldwide.

Most countries have failed to address aggressively the issue of embedded processors. While recent understanding is that failures here will be less than previously estimated, it is nevertheless the case that failure to address this issue will still cause some highly dependent sectors with complex sensor and processing systems to have problems, centered right on the January 1 date.

The lowest level of Y2K preparedness is evident in Eastern Europe, Russia, Latin America, the Middle East, Africa, and several Asian countries, including China.

The World Bank recently noted that the Y2K problem within developing countries has been overlooked because many observers assume developing countries are less dependent on computers in everyday national life. They point out that the majority of developing countries, even the poorest, have computerized essential services such as power generation, telecommunications, food and fuel distribution, and the provision of medical care. The Bank says that a general failure of such systems could endanger the health, security, and economic well-being of people in the developing world. We agree with this assessment.

Middle Eastern countries and firms have basic awareness of the Y2K problem and have made modest progress in remediation. The business sector, especially banking, seems best prepared in that region. Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates believe that their banks will be ready. Most government, business, and military remediation efforts are however, in general, poorly coordinated.

In Africa, efforts in South Africa are the best organized. South Africa leads the continent in recognition of the Y2K challenge and in activities to address it. As in the Middle East, most other government and military remediation efforts throughout the continent are, in general, poorly coordinated.

We see problems in Latin America. An October 1998 Gartner Group study indicated that in many nations of Latin America, at least 50 percent of companies will experience at least one mission critical failure. Even if governments and firms in Latin America devote sufficient resources to the problem, they will be hard pressed to complete remediation within the next 10 months to avoid systems failures.

Although Western Europe is in relatively better shape than most other regions, European awareness of and concern about the Y2K problem is uneven, and the Europeans lag the United States in fixing their problems. European attention was focused on modifying computer systems for the European Monetary Union conversion, which was implemented successfully on 1 January, but this was done, in many cases, by postponing coming to grips with Y2K problems.

The Asian economic crisis has hampered the Y2K remediation efforts of most of the Asia-Pacific countries. The appeal to the World Bank and others this week from eighteen Asia-Pacific nations during the Manila Y2K summit, asking for funding for Y2K remediation, was not surprising. There is much to be done. After a slow start in addressing the Y2K problem, China has stepped up efforts over the past two months in an attempt to meet a March 31 deadline imposed by the Ministry of Information for detection of Y2K problems. In mid- February 99, Chinese officials conducted the first test of several key systems in the financial, telecommunications, and electric power sectors. The civil aviation sector reportedly is also preparing for a nationwide test. While the lines of authority for Chinas Y2K effort have been established, remediation efforts in critical sectors such as electric power, transportation, and telecommunications appear to be lagging. Chinas late start in addressing Y2K issues suggests Beij ing will solve some, but not many of its Y2K problems in the limited time remaining, and will probably experience failures in key sectors. Chinas problems are exacerbated by the fact that, by some estimates, over 90% of the software used in China is pirated, including most of the software used in government offices and state owned enterprises. This could make it very difficult to approach software vendors for technical fixes and coincidentally, limits Chinas legal recourse should their software suffer Y2K-related problems.

Russia has exhibited a low level of Y2K awareness and remediation activity. While the Russians possess a talented pool of programmers, they seem to lack the time, organization, and funding to adequately confront the Y2K problem. The $3 billion estimate last month from Alexander Krupnov, Chairman of the Russian Central Telecommunications Commission, is six times the original estimate. Frankly, we do not know how they arrived at this number.

One issue we are watching in Russia relates to vulnerability of Soviet-designed nuclear plants in Central and Eastern Europe and Russia to Y2K-related problems. DOE analysts have done a systematic analysis of the safety of foreign reactors, and some of the former Soviet models are the worst. US nuclear reactor specialists know a great deal about the design and safety of these reactors, but they do not yet know what specific Y2K problems they may have. Documentation for plant equipment and software in use in Soviet-designed reactors is either poor or nonexistent. Many of the vendors who supplied this equipment or software have not been in business since the fall of the Soviet Union and are not available to help.

We envision two ways in which potential problems with Soviet-designed reactors could evolve. The first involves the operation of internal components or sensors crucial to the operation of the plant, being affected or degraded by Y2K problems. For example, a valve with a digital controller designed to automatically adjust the flow of cooling water, could potentially malfunction because the digital controller does not recognize the year 00. The second involves problems arising from the loss of off-site power to the reactor due to Y2K problems in the power grid. This could lead to a series of Y2K problems possibly occurring simultaneously, presenting an even greater challenge to the reactor operators.

While loss of electric power would in itself normally result in reactor shutdown, that process could potentially be complicated if internal Y2K problems arise within the reactor complex itself. We have not yet identified any safety-related equipment with Y2K-related problems within Soviet-designed reactors; however, other, non-safety- related equipment used to operate the plant may have problems. For example, in some Soviet-style reactors (RBMKs - 14 graphite moderated, water cooled reactors) a computer is used to control power production. Failure of this computer would cause activation of the safety systems, the control rods would automatically be inserted, and the reactor would begin to shut down. When external power is lost, diesel generators are used to supply power to cooling pumps to remove heat from the core. These diesels must have adequate fuel supplies on hand for at least a week in order to prevent fuel melt.

While some Soviet-designed reactors are less vulnerable to problems from Y2K failures due to safety improvements incorporated into their designs, other reactors currently in use in Russia and other former Soviet states and allies, such as the remaining reactor at Chernobyl, are of more concern. While DOE has initiatives underway designed to assist the Russians in reducing the risk of Y2K-related reactor safety issues, the Russians have been slow to accept our help. DOE is sponsoring a study at Pacific Northwest Laboratories to identify the most likely Y2K failures in Soviet-designed reactors from internal Y2K problems or from electric power grid problems--and to assess the implications of potential failures.

Russias Gazprom Natural Gas Pipeline network also is susceptible to potential Y2K outages. It supplies nearly 50 percent of the total energy consumed by Russia, almost 15 percent of the total energy consumed by Eastern Europe, and 5 percent of that consumed by Western Europe. Based on the natural gas storage capacity and the drawdown capability at the storage sites, we believe that Western Europe can survive a Gazprom shutdown for over 30 days. This assumes that there are no Y2K problems associated with distribution of the gas from the storage areas. Of greater concern are Eastern Europe, Russia itself, and the other states of the former Soviet Union should Russias ability to transport and export natural gas be interrupted in mid- winter. Russia will lose virtually all of its natural gas and the information that we have on the storage capacity and drawdown capability of Eastern Europe and other states of the former Soviet Union suggests that those countries could experience severe shortages should Gazprom shut down. Like all major pipeline operators, Gazprom has emergency contingency plans to assure continued gas delivery after a pipeline shutdown or explosion. While available options include manual equipment operation, use of stored gas, and switching to backup pipe segments, it is unclear whether these measures are sufficient to deal with the scale of problems that could occur due to Y2K failures.

Potential problems include:

Soviet-era mainframes--roughly equivalent to the IBM 360 and 370 series--have been used in Gazproms pipeline operations centers and are highly likely to contain Y2K vulnerabilities.

Gazprom uses supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems to monitor and control some pipeline operations. Nearly all SCADA systems purchased prior to the late 1990s contain some degree of Y2K vulnerability.

Satellite ground stations used to transfer data between gas-producing regions to Gazproms headquarters may have Y2K problems.

Several hundred unattended equipment stations along remote Siberian sections of Gazproms pipelines may rely on vulnerable embedded processors. While most of these should work, they all need to be tested to ensure their reliability. These stations are used to relay communications and may be used to control pipeline valves. Many of them are accessible only by special convoys or helicopter, and under normal circumstances are only visited twice per year. Compressor stations--over six hundred of which pump gas through the pipeline network--also contain embedded processors that could be vulnerable.

Military systems and their command and control are particularly information-technology dependent, and thus potentially vulnerable to disruption if Y2K problems are not adequately addressed. Foreign strategic missile systems, particularly in Russia and China, may experience Y2K-related problems. Missile-related concerns involve the vulnerability of environmental control systems within silos to Y2K disruption. Sensors and controllers need to be Y2K safe. Liquid- fueled missiles within silos must be monitored for fuel leaks. Optimum temperature and humidity levels must also be maintained within the silos. I want to be clear that while local problems are foreseeable, we do not see a problem in terms of Russian or Chinese missiles automatically being launched, or nuclear weapons going off, because of computer problems arising from Y2K failures. And, our assessment remains that we currently do not see a danger of unauthorized or inadvertent launch of ballistic missiles from any country due to Y2K problems.

Based on our analysis, we think the Russians may have some Y2K problems in the early warning systems that they use to monitor foreign missile launches, and at their command centers. You may have seen Maj. General Dvorkins statement at a Moscow press conference this week that the Y2K problem does threaten early warning and space control systems. Problems within these systems could lead to incorrect information being either transmitted, received, or displayed or to complete system outages. General Dvorkin stated that tests have revealed which hardware and software needs to be remediated or replaced and that final tests of the adjusted software will take place in October of this year. DoD has been working with the Russians for months on these problems. DoD has announced plans to establish a joint US-Russian Defense Y2K Coordination Center in Colorado Springs, CO in order to share early attack warning information, thus preventing confusion should any Y2K-related false or ambiguous warnings occur. A DoD delegation visited Moscow last month to help the Russians get up to speed on potential Y2K-related nuclear early warning problems.

Regarding world trade and oil, some of our most important trading partners--including China and Japan--have been documented by, among others, the Gartner Group, as behind the US in fixing their Y2K problems. Significant oil exporters to the United States and the global market include a number of countries that are lagging in their Y2K remediation efforts. Oil production is largely in the hands of multinational corporations in the oil-producing countries, but this sector is highly intensive in the use of information technology and complex systems using embedded processors. Microprocessors and computer systems are utilized for oil and gas production, processing, and transportation. Computers and microprocessors are used to monitor, report, and store data on the status of equipment and facilities and to assist in performing or controlling operations. In more sophisticated infrastructures, operations of equipment and facilities may be highly automated to enable networks of facilities to be controlled rem otely. This places that industry at risk of Y2K- related problems which could result in a slowdown of extraction, refining and delivery.

The oil sector is also highly dependent on ports, ocean shipping, and domestic infrastructures. Y2K specialists have noted that world ports and ocean shipping are among the sectors that have done the least to prepare for the Y2K problem.

Waterborne commerce carries not only oil but a significant amount of the world's goods of all types. It is difficult to predict at present the effect of Y2K on the shipping industry, however, many ships and transshipment points use higher level computer systems and equipment that contain embedded systems. Widespread failures in waterborne commerce carriers could also have significant impacts in the supply of food and commercial goods, resulting in possibly severe economic disruptions. Malfunction of navigational equipment either aboard or external to the ship may also occur, resulting in either collisions or groundings, potentially resulting in environmental problems.

Aviation has been one of the pioneers in automation and computer systems which are used on board aircraft and in control towers at airports. If global air traffic (personnel, air freight, package, and mail delivery) is seriously curtailed in 2000, this could have a significant impact on global business activity, not just the travel industry. Problems within this sector include the existence of radar systems deemed "legacy systems" that run older software and thus may be vulnerable.

Y2K problems in the telecommunications networks could negatively impact a broad range of other sectors that rely on the networks not only for communications but also for monitoring and load management. Many countries have telecommunications equipment with components purchased elsewhere, a fact that complicates the identification and remediation of Y2K-related problems. Sectors that are heavily dependent on telecommunications include banking, defense, electric power, natural gas, water, transportation, and food distribution. In addition, a functioning telecom network is crucial in emergency situations.

Our global and domestic markets for financial securities, commodities, products, and services depend completely on the smooth functioning of the vast information technology (IT) infrastructure. The banking industry is particularly affected by the year 2000 problem because nearly every aspect of the business is dependent on computer systems for processing transactions and providing information. It is as yet unclear what effect non-remediated foreign banks will have on the international banking system when they attempt to interact with the rest of the world.

The Y2K-related litigation issue continues to grow. Concerns about litigation have, in some cases, stifled the open exchange of information on Y2K-related issues. Many foreign officials and companies who are aware of Y2K problems are looking to the West, particularly the United States, for help and technical solutions. Foreign companies or governments may blame the United States and other foreign vendors for problems in equipment and thus seek legal redress for their failures.

In closing, let me note that today we are closely monitoring a broad range of countries and sectors worldwide in terms of their susceptibility to disruption by Y2K failures. We continue to gather information from all branches of the US Government, industry sources, a vast array of open sources (including hundreds of Web sites), and our own intelligence collection efforts so that we can accurately predict failures abroad and assess the implications. We are working very closely with the rest of the government, through the Presidents Council on Year 2000 Conversion, and will continue to share relevant information on the Y2K situation abroad. As our collection continues, and awareness of and reporting on Y2K problems abroad increases, our estimates of the type and extent of failures we are likely to see around the world will become more precise.

) 1999 United States Senate. All rights reserved.

Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem

United States Senate, SD-B40, Suite 3, Washington, DC 20510 (202) 224-5224, Year2000@y2k.senate.gov

Link

-- (dont@need.spam), November 05, 1999.

Once again you Dooming idiots fall all over yourselves trying to say how "dumb" the trolls are.

Hmmm, they seem to know which buttons to push, so they can't be all the dumb.

And since you LET THEM push your buttons I wonder who is really the more foolish. I don't wonder too hard though. If you people had just an ounce of self control this wouldn't happen.

Take it from me, I do trolling on both sides of the fence, and it never ceases to amaze me how easy it is to stir up people who like to think of themselves as rational and logical. If you would just shut stop painting those bullseyes on your backs then maybe, just maybe people would stop shooting at you.

-- (Doomers@suck.com), November 05, 1999.

If there are going to be changes I believe it will be a lot of politicallty correct pollys switching over due to the Nov 21 NBC movie and most of it will be done as a result of attempted pollyism.

I believe many people who see this movie will attempt to mock it making such idiot statements as "How could bad computers cause a blackout?" or "They really expect us to think that bad computers could affect airplanes? food delivery? etc."

I call them politically correct pollys because they are not genuine pollys who sincerely believe we will make it but rather the vast herds who don't think about it at all but know it's wrong to suggest it might be bad.

Not having bothered to think about anything beyond their own laptops they will make these types of mocking comments and maybe for the first time hear an answer and make a connection they so far had missed.

No, I'm not predicting Nov 22 as "Panic Day" but in the tradition of playing safe I will have ALL my preps finished before that movie airs

-- thomas thatcher (jabawaki@erols.com), November 05, 1999.

So.....should we prepare for Y2k or shouldn't we?

-- Bottled water (and@canned.goods), November 05, 1999.

You want a piece of this Doomersuck?

The email is real, you piece of sh!+

-- nothere nothere (notherethere@hotmail.com), November 05, 1999.

Nah. You know what they say: "It ain't over 'till its over..."

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), November 05, 1999.

I don't get it. What motivates someone to "troll?"

The "doomers" on this board seem to be motivated by a desire to do something good: support one another through these difficult times, perhaps get some people to be prepared, etc.

But the Polly's? Well why are they here? As you may have guessed by my e-mail, I went to Duke. We have a big rivalry with UNC, some of you may know. I don't waste my time on UNC BB's. I have better things to do.

If you don't believe Y2K will cause any problems, why waste your time here on destructive behavior. Find something you do believe in and be constructive with it instead!

I like to look at this from the old four quadrant win-win matrix

I wish I knew how to post it here, but basically, if everyone prepares, and nothing happens, it is the only win - win scenario. Every other combination creates losers.

I'll lay out all the scenario's if anyone is interested.

So lets prepare for the worst, and hope for the best!

-- Duke 1983 (Duke1983@AOL.com), November 05, 1999.

I was truly amazed awhile back when I saw a polly post which questioned who will be "eating crow" in 2000. At that time, it dawned on me that the biggest stakes that many pollies see with the y2k issue is whether or not a neighbor or two (or, heaven forbid, one of the TB2000 doomers) might snicker if they make any "premature" moves toward preparation or show any waffling on their stance.

Yes, I'm aware that doomers are equally reluctant to show any waffling, but they see the stakes as more along the line of whether or not the crow will eat them.

I would like to point out that virtually every doomer here has already changed his/her mind ("eaten crow", if you will) about y2k. What doomer here, upon first hearing of y2k, did not shrug it off or put it on the back burner? I myself was such a polly, although I never fully did the ostrich thing. Times have changed.

Every year the Red Cross warns people to evacuate areas where hurricanes are heading. It's always the kooks who wait till the last minute. Every year, some kooks wind up dead. 62% of Americans polled say they will take their money out of the bank in December. Less than 2% of bank deposits are withdrawable as cash. Big problem. Even the Red Cross says to begin taking money out of the bank "well before" 1/1/00. Eventually, even the die-hard skeptics will say, "You know, I think I'll take my money out because all these idiots might crash the banks - then in January, if all is well, I'll redeposit it."

When it is discovered that "the emperor has no cash", they will write checks for precious metals, in my opinion.

But, if January/February/March comes along and all is well and you decide to have some fun by emailing me about how stupid I am or whatever, guess what I'll say(?) I'll say, "Good greif! The pollies were right! Now I have to eat crow! I can't believe how stupid I was! I listened to the Red Cross and prepared for a hurricane that didn't even hit us!!" Based on the [often contradictory] information I have at hand and the less-than-optimistic studies I've read, I would not in the least bit feel embarrassed for having made preparations or for encouraging others to do likewise. On the contrary, like I told a friend of mine, "Look, you have a two-month old baby - if you don't start making some kind of commonsense preparations to make sure your baby is warm and fed - even if NOTHING happens, you will NEVER have my respect."

Let's not forget about the kids, gang, even the kids next door. I appreciate your sincerity. But you know, you could be wrong. It has happened before.

-- Zach Anderson (z@figure.8m.com), November 05, 1999.

Duke,

I just read you post. We must have been typing concurrently.

I wrote a piece a while back that you might like, based on a 3x3 win- win case for preparation, entitled Y2K: Nine Possible Futures.

I think it hints at what you are saying.

-- Zach Anderson (z@figure.8m.com), November 05, 1999.

Duh, no. But I suppose you pollies are still frequenting the market 3 times a day to buy a Pepsi. Please feel free to buy yourselves lots of useless crap this Christmas. I'm sure stocks and bonds are # uno on your loved ones lists. And don't forget lots of electrical gadgets for the kids. Go ahead and have a great big laugh on us. I mean, you'd wish that for us wouldn't you?

-- Gia (laureltree7@hotmail.com), November 05, 1999.

Doomers@suck and Y2K Pro why don't you guys take turns giving each other an enema. It would clear your thinking, improve your love life and give the rest of us a break.

-- Mabel Dodge (cynical@me.net), November 06, 1999.

Mr. Anderson - you said:

"62% of Americans polled say they will take their money out of the bank in December. Less than 2% of bank deposits are withdrawable as cash. Big problem. Even the Red Cross says to begin taking money out of the bank "well before" 1/1/00."

Where did you get these numbers? Didn't you mean to say that 62% were planning on having extra cash on hand? Didn't the Red Cross say to have extra cash on hand - not "take your money out"?

Just asking.

-- Lurking on the sidelines (Alw@ys lurking.com), November 06, 1999.

The 62% figure is from a Gallop Poll conducted for the Fed. See thread: Bank Runs Likely? Gallop Poll (6/2/99) for FRB, FDIC, OCC, OTS

The amount of available cash can be calculated from data available from the thread: The Latest Figures - Straight from the Federal Reserve Bank

According to the Red Cross brochure, "Y2K: WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW": "Plan to keep cash or traveler's checks in a safe place, and withdraw money from your bank in small amounts well in advance of 12/31/99."

I first saw the brochure in late 1998 and it is identical to the ones still being distributed. It is excellent advice. By withdrawing small amounts over a period of a year, less strain is introduced to the banking system. Unfortunately, their advice has been largely unheeded, therby probably intensifying the December-January scenario.

I expect a few well-publicized news stories in the near future of y2k doomers getting burglarized of all their cash holdings. Please note in advance, however, the Red Cross hint to buy Traveller's Cheques.

-- Zach Anderson (z@figure.8m.com), November 06, 1999.

Right on Zach! Your future scenario #7 is the win - win scenario. I'm prepared, but don't need the preparations. Society wins, the orphanage, or homeless shelter wins, I have some extra food. And the Polly's win, too, because they dodge a bullet.....Everyone wins!

-- Duke 1983 (Duke1983@AOL.com), November 08, 1999.

yeah, i've suddenly seen the light! i think it was the 1,113th time john koskinen said we'd all be all right as long as we didn't panic, or worry, or prepare. or was it the 1,114th time . . . .?

-- Cowardly Lion (cl0001@hotmail.com), November 08, 1999.

The bane of our modern society is the insistance upon polarization. The strategy is to couch opinions in black and white terms with no middle ground for any belief that varies from the extremes. This way, extremists try to force people to "choose" one "side" or the other , as they have defined those sides. They strengthen their position by limiting everone else's options of choice.

In my work, I have to fight to create a variety of good choices for the people I serve. It is not easy to fight the vortex that tries to suck you into the camp of one extreme or the other. I do believe, however, that having a full spectrum of choices and being held accountable for those we make is a hallmark of true freedom.

I have researched the y2k issue. The information has been uncertain and conflicting. I have chosen to take certain actions, largely in response to the uncertainty, itself. I refuse to be "sucked under" a label. If you cannot justify your own opinions to yourself based on logic, facts or emotions, don't try to use me and others to bolster "support" for your opinions by labeling mine. Are you incapable of independent thought? Must you have a cadre of supporters to feel comfortable with the validity of your own opinion?

-- anon (anon@anon.calm), November 08, 1999.

I think I fear massive calamity, but I don't think we'll have massive calamity, but it could be a reality. I don't know if it will be a reality, maybe it will be a reality and maybe I should fear massive calamity, but if I fear massive calmity and it does become a calamity and I'm not prepared for that calamity then I'll have to face the reality that I didn't think would become a reality.

-- Do you get it? (getit?@getittt.xcom), November 08, 1999.