Did I say we'd have obvious, spectacular failures at The Rollover?

No.

What's Wrong with the Way the World Thinks about Y2K

Indeed, I spent ten weeks and more writing essays to explain why obvious, spectacular failures at The Rollover were not the real issue. The experts I cite and quote most frequently all agree, and have for quite some time, that it was unlikely there would be obvious, spectacular failures at The Rollover, by and large, and that they weren't the real issue anyway.

Since there were no obvious, spectacular failures at The Rollover, I'm wondering exactly how it is that I (and they) have been wrong. Except, of course, in the minds of those who never cared what I have really thought or written, but who wanted to lump me in with the Collapse of Civilization Crowd. And in the minds of Doomers who thought that they were right just because Pollyannas were wrong.

As far as I can see, things are proceeding so far as I have thought they would. And as I have been writing about for many months. You'll say I'm backpedalling, but I'm not. I have maintained this position publicly for months: but you don't know that, because you don't care what I think or write, or you deliberately chose to not understand or to distort. (Indeed, one of my motivations for getting it all on record in the last three months of 1999 was that I knew the Pollyannas would try to distort what I had been saying.)

I am more optimistic now than I was six months ago, not because there were no obvious, spectacular failures at The Rollover, but because there haven't been serious, widespread deleterious effects on business and commerce from errors in the past three months. What happens over the next month will be determinative of the future course of events.

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), January 01, 2000

Answers

Yep. That's just about the kind of detailed, fact-based, reasoned analysis I expected from The Pollyannas. :-)

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), January 01, 2000.

Lane,

Your work and close analysis of trends going into this was terrific; I look forward to more as y2k continues to unfold. Thank you very much from Toronto.

-- silver ion (ag3@interlog.com), January 01, 2000.

I agree with you, Lane. You've been consistent.

Other people I also respect were wrong. The CIA, the Naval War College, and other monitoring groups... They all predicted immediate Y2K effects. It doesn't appear that it happened. I'm not disappointed, just surprised. The failures that were found in testing simply didn't exist in reality. Or so it seems.

The long-term effects of Y2K still haven't been tested in the slightest. And there, you may be absolutely correct. I hope not.

-- Dog Gone (layinglow@rollover.now), January 01, 2000.

And still the pollys can't go away. You'd think they'd be off trying to sue their utilities, banks and government officials for "wasting" all of their money like that. ;)

-- Servant (public_service@yahoo.com), January 01, 2000.

Wow! So you are an embedded software engineer!? I'm impressed!! Judging by your deep comments and reasoned analysis on this forum, I was positive that you were a 17 year-old, pimply faced, scateboarder from a dysfunctional family! From now on I will read your postings with careful atention and bated breath....

Hey Lane! Keep us posted. May your new year be blessed and properous. Ignore this idiot.

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 01, 2000.

I'm not a Doomer. The Doomers (some of them, at least) seem to have realized that, but The Pollyannas (most of them, it seems) declined to make the necessary distinction.

Thanks to those with kind words. And to those who have sent me e- mails today.

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), January 01, 2000.

I've even seen the pollies try to call Gary North a doomer. ROTFL, I can't think of anyone more optimistic than Gary regarding y2k.

-- Butt Nugget (catsbutt@umailme.com), January 01, 2000.

Har! Where were you right is the question? Yeah, you had this one pegged, Lane. This forum is filled with quotes from you about how come 2 January 2000, there would be no significant problems in any country. So what's your call now? Y2k will hit when and how, or do you know anything about Y2k? Keep shovelling.

    --bks

-- Bradley K. Sherman (bks@netcom.com), January 01, 2000.

Some of the "answers" seem to refer to non-existant statments?

Would I be correct in assuming that the sysops have deleted a few answers in this thread?

Mikey2k

-- Mikey2k (mikey2k@he.wont.eat.it), January 01, 2000.

bks: Please don't post when you are drunk. Thank you.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), January 01, 2000.

Lane,

WOW, excellent analysis.

I particularly liked Koskenin's quote that few of the problems will occur at rollover.

Everyone - take the time to review Lane's linked analysis.

-- G (balzer@lanset.com), January 01, 2000.

Yes, Mikey, you are right. My earlier comments were directed at one of the usual trolls who was harrassing Lane in a stupid and unreasonable manner. I don't remember for sure who it was, I think the debunking@doomeridiots.com guy. Anyway, in the middle of his mindless rant, he informed us that he was an embedded systems engineer. Thankfully, someone deleted him.

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 01, 2000.

Well lets see, so far Lane Core Jr. and Roleigh Martin of the doomsayers have come out saying that they weren't wrong about Y2K. Now THIS is beyond hilarious, lol.

Regards,

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), January 01, 2000.

Now Lane Core is trying to define what "is" is! Too much. OK, Lane, you were right. Your vision of y2k looks dumber by the day, but you're right anyway. Feel better now?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 01, 2000.

I stand by what I have written, not by what anybody thinks I have written.

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), January 02, 2000.

By What you've written? All you do is seem to quote what other experts!!!!!! ( such as the famous Paula Gordon and Bruce Beach) wrote.

And Don't think for a minute anyone will forget your famous negative analysis of the Grid and NERC. You read all of their press releases and that gave you all the knowledge you needed.

You are an immature lille boy who isn't even smart enough to know what he doesn't know.

-- The Engineer (The Engineer@tech.com), January 02, 2000.

I find this serial diatribe against Lane and his work completely useless. Shooting the messenger, hit and run, ignoring clearly written disclaimers regarding outcomes but nevertheless demanding perfect pre-rollover prognostications, fitting the facts to alternate conclusions...these are classic disinformation tactics and serve to block rather than facilitate meaningful post-rollover discourse.

-- Colleen Childers (ecopsynw@memes.com), January 03, 2000.

Colleen: Do you like to mudwrestle?

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), January 03, 2000.

Colleen:

What would you consider "meaningful" at this point? Personally, I find a great deal of meaning in people whose predictions were wrong, now coming back and saying "Wrong? Me? Where?"

I think you need to be aware that those of us who predicted minor problems spent the last year or two being called assholes, morons, idiots, shills, sheep, stupid, and so on ad nauseum. And now those who wielded their weapons like schoolyard bullies are backpedaling into full buckwheat CYA mode, without a word of apology. Except those who are still attacking out of long-ingrained habit.

Whatever has yet to happen will happen, and we'll all watch it carefully. But the psychology being illustrated of people like Lane Core is probably more meaningful than just watching the y2k denoument.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 03, 2000.