Face the reality folks (those of you who are still unwilling to alter your pessimistic views on Y2K), things don't look quite the same as they did a year or even a few months ago. Things are looking a lot better. Many of you used to scream for the government\big companies to wake up and concentrate on fixing the problem. When they did, late though it was, and then told you that the fix was going to work, you refused to believe them. You had already made up your mind: Y2K can't be fixed, it's too big, not enough time, etc. I too, once felt that it was my duty to prepare and warn people about the coming catastrophe, and I expected people to get panicky as the end of 1999 approached. But that didn't happen, because as the deadline drew nearer, section after important section of the national and international infrastructure reported compliance. Companies, although they did not know how bad the bug might be, were willing to dedicate the time and money to the problem that it required, and make the necessary alterations to their business systems. But there are those of you who will be convinced until the end that EVERYONE is lying, NOONE knows what they are talking about, the government NEVER succeeds with a big project. These ultra-skeptics simply believe what they want to believe, no matter what other views are presented them. It takes an open mind to change an opinion you have held so deeply for a long time. But just look at Mr. Yardeni. The man was a hardcore "alarmist, doomer", whatever you want to call him. He doubted the Y2K Bug could be beat. And I totally was with him. But he has altered his views because of realism and common sense. I know some of you will label me polly, and I can't help that. Just don't call me a troll. I'm only stating my honest opinion; if you don't like it, sorry.

-- Brandon Wright (sorrytorain@onyour.parade), November 30, 1999

Answers

You're right, awareness has elevated among businesses, it would appear. But what kind of awareness? It seems like it's merely that "This isn't as big a problem as we thought" is more appropriate than, "We got it licked!"

Too many loose ends, too many weak links, within the country and especially without the country (all interdependant).

One cannot say we are in better shape than we had hoped. We are in way worse shape than we had hoped. Perhaps we're in slightly better shape than we could have been, but not much. The problem HAS NOT BEEN FIXED, and if it truly was a big problem, IT STILL IS. The broken code is systemic and ubiquitous, pervasive, down the whole production chain of our society and our cross-dependent world.

I am not lightening up on my calamitous expectations. It certainly would be a nice surprise if it were less disastrous, but I most surely don't expect it.

PS, Yardeni is still quite concerned in his forecast.
A 35% chance of a sustained depression is terrificly high.

-- faith'nhope (y2kaos@home.com), November 30, 1999.

So, Brandon, why don't you tell us why you are concerned enough for those who are still worried about the outcome of the rollover to post this message? What is it to you if people don't feel convinced that the information available is not enough to change their mind?

-- WeedWhacker (no@email.com1), November 30, 1999.

Yeah, I have days like that too...then some new Big Bad News is released and I'm off to the store for more food.

The schizophrenia (I'm a Doomer...no, wait...I'm a Polly...) seems to come and go.

But before you get complacent, consider:

1) Without end-to-end testing, don't count on a BITR 2) One word: OIL 3) "It's the economy, stupid!" 4) Murphy was an optimist

Hang on to your preps...

LunaC

-- LunaC (LunaC@moon.com), November 30, 1999.

"The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated." - Mark Twain

There is no doubt in my mind that the billions of dollars spent on remediation will have a positive effect on the outcome of Y2K. However, I rather expect that the reports of compliance have also been exaggerated.

The job of fixing bugs has a nasty way of introducing new bugs. The job of testing software has never be done sufficiently well to eliminate bugs from large, complex programs. Never. One can only hope that the testing touched all the most important functionality of the code, using realistic data.

The only really predictable thing about Y2K is that the competance of the remediators will be all over the map, and so will the results. But it is also safe to say that their efforts will have a pronounced effect in a positive direction, compared to not having done anything at all.

I say, if neolithic farmers could build the Stonehenge, then there is hope that 80,000 COBOL programmers might manage to tone Y2K down to a dull roar.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), November 30, 1999.

Hey Brandon, I don't know what you are reading, but I don't seem to getting the same message as you are. In fact the senate report doesn't seem to agree with you either. No matter what big business and the government tells us, I won't truly believe them until I see no problems after the roll over. Besides, both have never lied to the public before have they? You trust your life to their promises, I won't trust mine!! RRR

-- RRR (RRR@lurking.com), November 30, 1999.

Brandon:

There is a sense in which I agree with you. Yet, although my sense of urgency left, I still continue along the main lines of the preparations I planned back "then".

Why do I do this? For me there are still too many unknowns, and I have this feeling that the International scene may tip the balance in favor of a bad depression (or worse).

So although I don't cry doom and gloom, I guess I am a pessimistic skeptic in that sense.

Our preparations were all about life-style changes and so we march on just in case. After all, if Y2K isn't the trigger, something else may be, and I'd hate to see my children hungry if I had a chance to prevent it.

-- Ron Southwick (southwick@a-znet.com), November 30, 1999.

You obviously have Yardeni confused with someone else. He never expected more than a recession. His estimated probability of a depression has remained at 5% for a long time. Take a look at his latest survey results. A very substantial percentage of companies have not completed their critical systems.

-- Dave (dannco@hotmail.com), November 30, 1999.

Dr. Edward Yardeni's most recent take on Y2K...

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001tLg

...which, by the way, hasn't changed much at all.

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), November 30, 1999.

Brandon, I haven't changed my pessimistic view. Oprahs show convinced me even more so now that we are in deep do-do. When you have a program with only government officials on the bench and no other experts from the opposite side you know that something isn't quite right. Three days of food and water, and prepare as you would for a winter storm? The government has people convinced that it's going to be a winter storm and not a computer problem. Clever indeed. Now that you have common sense, realism and honesty, I suppose this was your good bye speech to all of us at TB2000.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), November 30, 1999.

Brandon,

Electricity and banking in the U.S. seem to be in much better shape than they were a year and a half ago. Still, my guess is that Y2K's impact on society is going to last more than three days. Oil is still a big question mark. So are some government programs:

[snip]

The 18 "at risk" federal programs include: child nutrition; food safety inspection; food stamps; supplemental nutrition program for women, infants and children (WIC); student aid; child care; child support enforcement; child welfare; Indian health services; low- income home energy assistance; Medicaid; Medicare; temporary assistance for needy families; public housing; unemployment insurance; retired rail worker benefits; air traffic control system; and maritime safety.

[snip]

Also see...

http://www.house.gov/reform/gmit/y2k/991122.htm

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), November 30, 1999.

Link for the above snip about "at risk" federal programs:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001qX5

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), November 30, 1999.

Brandon -

Which articles of Ed Yardeni's have you read in the past 18 months? How many of his "Y2K Action Days" did you listen to?

I ask because you seem to think that he's come over all warm and fuzzy about Y2K impacts, while I have seen minimal change in his position. His "take" has always been that the impacts will be primarily economic, and potentially very serious. This has lead to his being called an "alarmist". He commented quite a while back that he doesn't really mind that label, saying "I guess I am an alarmist, because I'm alarmed!"

Current thread re his recent newsletter: Dr. Yardeni's "Final Answer"

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), November 30, 1999.

Brandon,

A few reasons to continue: 50% of small/medium sized business have done nothing, oil, the Senate 100-Day Report, the Institue of Electrical and Electronic Engineers reports, etc., etc.

I have days where I turn Polly as well, but I keep coming back to a quote I read about Y2K preparations - "better to have and not need than to need and not have." Y2K preps are cheap insurance - you can "eat" the premium!!!

Time will tell. I hope I'm wrong...

-- No Polly (nopolly@hotmail.com), November 30, 1999.

Brandon,

I suspect you were motivated to write this after watching the Oprah show. Have you read the most recent Senate Report? Much work has indeed been done, but the majority of the work is untested, and therefore the results are unknown.

I began researching this issue 18 months ago with the intent of finding good news that would put my concerns to rest. I consider good news to be fact-based assurances that all will be well. Even your beloved government warns that problems still exist and that Y2k will be life threatening and severe in other countries. Our booming economy depends on trading partners. We are all in this together, and none of us will be left untouched.

All is not well, sir, and there is no parade in progress.

And you are, by definition, a troll. You knew exactly the response you would get here.

-- semper paratus (always@ready.now), November 30, 1999.

Don't come lookin' for my food or you'll have to deal my my freinds Bushmaster, and Mossberg, WOW i can't stand pollies!!

-- Rational Doomer (doomer@big.time), November 30, 1999.

Brandon: Now, don't panic, but you are experiencing the effects of being sprayed by chemtrails. This is how it starts; first you feel a sense of general well-being, and then a feeling of trust for your fearless leaders. As it progresses, you will begin to question why you ever thpought you should take responsibility for your own actions and loved ones. It's dangerous ju-ju, boy, you better get inside and see if you have any polly-off.

God

-- Pinkrock (aphotonboy@aol.com), November 30, 1999.

Hey Brandon!, "Things are looking a lot better!". Now that you've led me to that conclusion what else would you like me to admit? My mind is so OPEN, I'm ready to accept anything. Fortunately you have parted the clouds, and the sun is shining on my parade again. THAT's why I come to this forum. Thanks, Brandon!!

-- Guy Daley (guydaley@bwn.net), November 30, 1999.

THREE THINGS...oil, electric utility infrastructure and the JIT food distribution system. All CRITICAL to the outcome. Not a word of verified status of compliance. Self reported evaluations and statements of compliance are meaningless.

-- Irving (irvingf@myremarq.com), November 30, 1999.

What is it that motivates the "pollies" out there to try to save us from spending OUR OWN FRIGGING MONEY on some cans of beans and toilet paper? Why is it sooooo important to them? Hmmmm?

-- Ludi (ludi@rollin.com), November 30, 1999.

Ludi, I have asked this question many times. ESPECIALLY in view of the fact that THEIR TAX DOLLARS get "wasted" on Y2K preparation activities by the government -- such as the 50 BILLION DOLLAR "Y2K Crisis Center" in Dee Cee -- and the pollies don't complain in the slightest. As in, not a peep.

You would think, wouldn't you, that the pollies would be complaining to the Congressional reps about the horrendous waste of their tax dollars regarding the "non-event" of Y2K. But no, it's OK for the government to spend their money on bunkers, generators, troop manuvers, etc., for Y2K.

But for YOU to buy a three month supply of stored food? Why, that's un-American! (And to go to your bank and withdraw CASH ... Why, that is TREASON!!!!)

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), December 01, 1999.

KOS, I concur totally. Obviously the economic impact of the tiny fraction of the public that GI is not going to be a fraction of what the government and corporations have spent on this issue. Are these people just unstable and like to be irritating in general, or do I get the subtle impression of an ulterior motive?

John Ludi, pondering...

-- Ludi (ludi@rollin.com), December 01, 1999.

polly troll.

-- nothere nothere (notherethere@hotmail.com), December 01, 1999.

Bastard der boonkah polly troll! Hie thee off to CPR's lair and leave us alone!

And Sysops, I vote to DELETE DELETE DELETE !!!!!!

-- Troll Buster (troll@busters.unite), December 02, 1999.