My original comments are marked with brackets [].

"Yes, Decker the world today IS markedly different than 25 years ago. More folks dependent on the computerized welfare dole. More violence, drugs, and dangerous criminals on the street and in prisons. Less family values and patriotism. Many more people concentrated into smaller areas. Fewer self sufficient farms and businesses. Lower saving rate, higher percentage living on credit. Thanks for making my point.

[...the economic problems of the early 70s cannot be reduced to the motives and actions of a few individuals responsible for a share of oil production. Sorry, "a," the world economy is a teensy bit more complex. Oil price shocks hit an economy with some fundamental weaknesses and problems were exacerbated by poor public policy decisions. We also had a oligopolistic domestic economy that had been sheltered from vigorous global competition, a move off the gold standard, the end of the Vietnam War... it's a rather long list...]

Yes, and the list of y2k issues is much, much longer. Again, THAT's my point. You failed to address my main worries, so I'll elaborate a little.

Lets say we have no power problem in the US. What about the rest of the world? What about our imported oil & gas? Is it reasonable to conclude that this very REAL problem will at least parallel the ARTIFICIAL problem created by the oil embargo? I think the CIA thinks so and terms it "severe".

How will this affect transportation, agriculture, government services, medical care, and all the other industries dependent on energy and that will be hit by their own y2k issues?

Japan's banks are folding. Their postal pension scam is ready to detonate in a few months. They are totally dependent on imported food and oil. There is little doubt that y2k will be the straw that breaks the camel back.

Russia's banks are also insolvent. Their society is a shambles, run mostly by organized crime. Their chemical refineries and nuke plants are extremely vulnerable. And for some reason they keep dusting off their nuclear weapons and making veiled threats.

UK - faltering in their own remediation attempts. Europe - dependent on Russia, mentioned above, for their energy. Koreas - either starving or almost at war. India/Pakistan - ditto. Iraq - essentially a wasteland. China/Tiawan - also unstable, poorly prepared for y2k. Indonesia - toast. Italy - hasn't started remediation. African nations - no clue about y2k and dependant on aid from the developed world. Aid that will not be available post 2000. South America - narrowly avoided economic meltdown a few months ago, what will the stresses of y2k bring? Mexico - will they need another 40 billion?

And speaking of economic stresses, what about all those hedge funds, leveraged to the HILT, that come due in a few short months? I may not be an macroeconomist like you, but I sure as shit know a pyramid scheme when I see one. Tech stocks? Have they made a profit yet? Gee, the flower bulbs bought and sold during the Tulip Panic didn't either. Amazon.com, little more than a warehouse connected to a database and web page, worth more than Union Pacific? Wow.

Social Security, entitlements and pensions of retiring baby boomers? No problem. Congress says we'll have a trillion dollar surplus by 2015. Uh oh. That was based on fallacies, like reduced spending and continued "ebay.com" style economic growth.

We all know what terrible shape the rest of the worlds currency is in, but what about here at home? We have a Fractional Reserve System that has been manipulated to the point that folks like you agree that its a matter of CONFIDENCE now (as in con game) that it stays afloat

What about out nations capital? What will life be like in DC for the lawmakers post y2k? When do you think they will emerge from their bunkers?

Water - say we have plenty. What about the rest of the world? Too bad, so sad, you say? Will there be war in the Mideast when these systems fail due to y2k? Have you read the PBS Crash page? Did you see the show? The rest of the world is mired in hard times RIGHT NOW Deck. Y2K ain't gonna make things any better.

Increasing terrorism threat? Solar interruptions? Intensifying hurricanes? Freaking TAX PAYOFF DAY coming LATER every YEAR?

I could go on, but I'm busy at work maintaining part of the infrastructure that allows you to sit on your ass and pontificate about how brilliantly astute you are, and how pessimistic and shallow people like me can twist thing around...

[...As to your second issue, the free market is resolving Y2K problems at a brisk pace. Like most, I worry more about the public sector where there is no profit motive. Seriously, "a," most people acknowledge the overall progress of the private sector in the U.S. has been excellent. Why? Because these companies want to continue making a profit in the year 2000. It's just Adam Smith's invisible hand at work....]

You are too optimistic. Overall, its extremely clear that the remediation has failed. Of COURSE there are success stories, Decker. No "doomer" ever believed that NOTHING would be fixed. But it is insufficient. Not just worldwide, but domestically as well. And I'm not going to go into the lying and spin doctoring that has been perpetrated by FAA, NERC, FDIC, and the rest of the crew. That's a subjective issue and suffice to say that we have a lot of wishful thinkers among the captains of government and titans of industry.

[...On the "hand," the much vaunted Y2K remediation firms have little luster. Nor do we see COBOL programmers making pro athlete salaries. I keep an eye on the marketplace for Y2K "price signals." If there was a spike in Y2K remediation "prices" (generically speaking), it might indicate a shortage of resources. As it is, the question for some IT professionals is, "What now?"]

The remediation was by and large mishandled from day one. The fact that there was not a larger boom in the y2k field is not indicative that the problem was smaller than we first thought. All estimates have ballooned, not shrunk. The lack of higher salaries reflects more on the office politics of management and their software coding peons than it does on some complex economic indicator that you suggest. And BTW, the folks that ARE gearing up to make the $1000, $2000 per hour salaries are the lawyers, Decker. I wonder why that's so? Gee, could it be the estimated TRILLION dollars in litigation that the IEEE has warned us about? Wake up son. You're missing the important hints.

[...Don and I agree on some of the fundamental weaknesses in the economy. If/when we suffer a recession, it will not be due solely to Y2K. For extra credit on your first Econ 101 oral exam, please list the other factors that may contribute to an economic downturn in 2000. (laughter)]

I am glad that you have now accepted that a recession, at least, is inevitable. I understand that you had to be alerted to y2k by your parents, and that you were a late bloomer to it all. So, you've made progress. Hopefully, your mind has not closed and you soon accept the information we are presenting here objectively. Remember, Deck,

"Only Fools never change their minds." - Voltaire

-- a (a@a.a), July 13, 1999."

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 29, 2000

Answers

"Remember, Deck, "Only Fools never change their minds." - Voltaire -- a (a@a.a), July 13, 1999." "

I'm sure that if I look up the word "irony" in the dictionary that quote will be there as a classic example.

-- abc (123@456.789), March 29, 2000.

Y-A-W-N

-- (Your Pal@work.now), March 29, 2000.

Anybody ever figure out who "a" was? My guess has always been either Cory Hamasaki or Paul Milne.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), March 29, 2000.

look "a" up yourself - 198.253.33.21

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), March 29, 2000.

Lisa, why are you yawning? Are you also yawning about Ed Y's latest "net book"? It is just a rehash of his worthless drivel from 99.

Care to elaborate?

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), March 29, 2000.

Outings:

Did a search on that address and here is the best match. Gotta love those searches.

198.253.33.21 64% American League Corn holer Fantasy Baseball Effective SEP 27 99 Transaction Report 01 AL Golden Sporks James Frazer 10 AL LA Party Animals

Not a comment, for your amusement only.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), March 29, 2000.

I hope "a" is still lurking. He was posing as ..@-- and other combinations on this forum.

The quote from Voltaire is really too delicious.

As for the supposed "boredom," I find it quite amusing. This was "life and death" stuff last year. Now it's all passe. (chuckle) We haven't even tapped into the "Why are pollies so stupid" posts.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 29, 2000.

Don't know what you used Z, but I get this:

Reverse Lookup Result: sc033ws021.nosc.mil

Naval Ocean Systems Center (NOSC-DOM) NCCOSC Code N3103 49590 Lassing Road, Room B249 San Diego, CA 92152-6199

-- (outings@sux.com), March 29, 2000.

Outings:

Not fair, you used meaningful software. I did it with an AOL product just to see what happened. That's why I posted it. I thought it was funny. As I said not a comment about you. Really a comment about my provider's software.

Best wishes,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), March 29, 2000.

Anybody remember these?

Yes, It's STILLL, STILL, STILL Y2K Stupid Author - Russ Lipton (A.K.A. "BigDog")
The Simplicity of Y2K: I Just Have A Few Small Questions Left - Same
come ON you guys, BIG DOG still needs an answer (so do I, so do YOU) Author - grngrl

You will laugh yourself silly as you read the pompous and the arrogant (not to mention incorrect!), countered by the few voices of reason. What a goldmine of fun!

-- HumorGem Miner (LMAO@those.oldies!), March 29, 2000.

I laughed out loud to go down memory lane with Russ Lipton, aka "Big Dog."

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 29, 2000.

I may have to post a "compendium" on Good Ol Russ! Sort of a "top 10" of his greatest hits (or would that be "misses"?)

God, I love those pessimists and their "I am certain and you are stupid" remarks!

-- HumorGem Miner (LMAO@those.oldies!), March 29, 2000.

Come to say, I haven't seen everyone's favorite nutcase wacko "a" for awhile at ezboard. Postings like the ones "a" posts give me insight into the psyche of the lunatic fringe. Very instructional. And disturbing.

-- haha (haha@haha.com), March 29, 2000.

How'd you do dat?

Outings, you shouldn't tease us by posting that address without telling us how to get to "reverse lookup".

-- (I wanna know@I wanna know.now!), March 29, 2000.

I did not post that "(outings@sux.com)" comment

I suspect they used osilabs or some other reverse lookup service.

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), March 29, 2000.

Thanks a lot, OutingsR, but I just ran that IP through the Osi-lab reverse DNS and didn't get anything. Do you have to pay for the service before they give you the information?

-- (I wanna know@Iwanna .know now!), March 29, 2000.

At Osi-lab, I put in:

OSI-LAB Contact and Address

Please enter the IP Address

Please note that IP Addresses should be entered in decimal

198.253.33.21

DNS Server to query:

osidns.osilab.chgd2ipns.swissptt.chgdvdns1.vptt.chscsnms.switch.chchx4 00.switch.ch

Last update: December 16, 1999

query resulted in:

OSI-LAB Contact and Address

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

I looked up the DNS Server:

Sorry, no name found for 198.253.33.21+

Come on, tell me how to do dat and get it right.

If you do, I'll give you a dollar.

-- (I wanna know@I wanna know.now!), March 29, 2000.

Besides the belly laughs, Humor's links make it painfully clear why Yourdon decided to prohibit Hoffmeister from posting to the censored forum. Classic examples.

Another thing those old threads highlight is the sheer number of regular posters who kinda just up and vanished after rollover. So many of them, falling all over themselves to kiss Big Dog's feet once Yourdon had blessed that nonsense. Whatever became of them? Is it possible this current forum is as balanced as it is because so many foot kissers decided to hide from the light of reality? Great stuff.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), March 29, 2000.

I agree Flint... I don't think we'll see any of BD's toadies on this forum. "a" was trying to hide out, but I spotted his warped logic rather quickly. I must confess... I dropped a few emails to a some regulars who had used real email addresses. And I might have to do a few more after this.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 29, 2000.

Hey! Is anybody going to answer my question?

-- (I wanna know@I wanna know.now!), March 29, 2000.

All of the sites that were identified and that I read [10 out of 2093] were at an AOL address. Not that I trust this engine.

Best wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), March 29, 2000.

Z! Get back here and tell me how you're looking that information up!

Please

-- (I wanna know@I wanna know.now!), March 29, 2000.

Isn't anybody going to tell me?

-- (I'd sure@like.to know), March 29, 2000.

I'd:

What for? What have you really learned, assuming you can discover that Imadummy@sea.lost is actually Joe Schlabotnick from Kansas City? One name is as meaningless as another.

Although I suppose it would be nice to know how many different names Old Git has used to troll this forum...

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), March 29, 2000.

"I suppose it would be nice to know how many different names Old Git"

I want to know, don't you???

How ELSE do we satisfy our curiosity?

(Curiosity is our second most important teacher.)

Goodnight, to you, and sweet dreams.)

-- (I'd sure like@to.know), March 29, 2000.

One thing is apparent. Old posts by the anonymous yahoo known as a@a.a do not mellow with age. There is usually a good reason for exhuming a corpse. So, what was the reason for exhuming this one?

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), March 29, 2000.

"a" can teaching us something, Brian.

(Corpes, aren't just dead meat, you know.)

-- (la bella@nocha.com), March 29, 2000.

What can "a" teach us? Please enlighten me.

-- haha (haha@haha.com), March 30, 2000.

It amazes me how smug and gloating you "pollys" are... you were so insightfull... so right.

Look at all the Governments and Major Corps that were so stupid as to waste all that money and time on the FUD that those such as Yourdon and North put out... totally amazeing how smart and right you were.

Yes... you super smart and bright guys/girls were so right, pat yourselves on the back.... for something someone else fixed :-)

-- Netghost (ng@no.yr), March 30, 2000.

"oligopolistic"

Boy, I just love that kinda talk.

-- Decker, (what@dick.head), March 30, 2000.

"a" never understood what he used as his name.

a is a

Facts are facts, what is, is.

He assumed that what "he" thought was if fact how it was. He had a closed mind that he would not allow to open to facts or anything he did not agree with.

Bad move.

Immagine how many people actually wrote things that they now wish they had never written and wish they could erase from the memories of the computers of the world that have saved them.

Then there is having to live around the people they know in real life.

Now they ask what went so wrong..... Nothing went wrong, it went right.

Now it is time to pay attention to what is wrong still and get it fixed, like outdated oil pipelines...

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), March 30, 2000.

Big Dog+ Big Ego=Big Turd.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), March 30, 2000.

Yes... you super smart and bright guys/girls were so right, pat yourselves on the back.... for something someone else fixed :-)

Speak for yourself, Casper.

-- Hoff (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), March 30, 2000.

Awww.....that's sweet...you guys missed me! Cheer up fellas, I still lurk here.

Ken, 90% of what I said in the post you so thoughtfully regurgitated are still pressing problems. As you remember, my best guess was that the global economic situation, which I labeled as more serious than y2k, would be pushed over the brink by the failures associated with software problems. And yes, I still expect a coming depression based on the things in the other 90% of that post (hey - what can I say - I'm a doomer).

I felt partially responsible for the y2k situation because of a 17 year career spent in the computer science field struggling with management types that were at a loss to understand increasing system complexity. As for the possibility that things would go "Milne"...I regarded it as a 1 in 5 chance. But as Flint and I argued, it was more about stakes than odds, and I firmly believed that for timely action to be taken, the magnitude of the situation could not be diminished. It was my decision to err on the side of caution, and I'll live with it.

I have already posted a farewell, an apology, and admission of error, so I won't babble any more about being wrong and will let you folks resume whipping a dead horse. Have fun.

And thanks for reminding me what a "pompous ass" you are. At least I was correct about that.

-- a (a@a.a), March 30, 2000.

a

You need to think of yourself in a higher regard than a 'dead horse'.

I seemed to remember being 'whipped' around here for my views (when they were right all along).

What goes around, comes around..........

Hope things are well with you a.

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), March 30, 2000.

Brian, exhuming bodies (of work) is a task for those of us with a stronger stomach. I will write an entire new post about the human tendency to reach a conclusion... and then defend it even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Be patient.

Ghost, some of us actually had Y2K-related responsibilities... and managed them well. Not all organizations overreacted to Y2K. One might have an interesting discussion about why some organizations "wasted" time and money on Y2K. Or why the CIA and other agencies released "CYA" reports. Of course, this is well beyond your normal scope of discourse. By the way, Ghost, what were your Y2K-related responsibilities... ensuring the slurpee machine worked on rollover?

Cherri, I agree.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 30, 2000.

Ken, you're busting my gut!

All you "pollies" better knock it off! All this being right crap is going to kill someone....they will laugh themselves to death!

(I wonder if if I am a little twisted; does anyone else enjoy the pleasure of watching the doomers squirm like worms on hot ashes?)

LOL!

-- A little psychopathetic (DGI@having.fun.w/the.doombrood!), March 30, 2000.

Lets also remember that people like NetLost and "ahhhhh" would prefer if we didn't bring up the fact that they were the pompous arrogant ones in 98/99; they had no problem castigating the "stupid pollys" for "stopping people from prepping" and I'm sure they said more than once, "you will have blood on your hands"

Payback is a bitch, huh guys?!

LMAO!

-- A little psychopathetic (DGI@having.fun.w/the.doombrood!), March 30, 2000.

>> I will write an entire new post about the human tendency to reach a conclusion... and then defend it even in the face of overwhelming evidence. <<

Ken, you are an author of great promise. A new piece of critical thought from you will be well worth reading. Have at it.

The problem with this thread was that it could have been brewed up by Marianne, Chronicler of TP. Nothing new here. Just a lengthy quote from last July, growing moldier by the day. (You know a musical group is getting clapped out when they issue their Greatest Hits CD.)

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), March 30, 2000.

Oh, "a," we're both pompous asses... but one of us was proven right. And it was always less about what you said and more about how you said it. My point was not to beat on you (though it is a tempting thought), but more to prove how a gloomy predisposition influences one's thought process. When you have already decided the "ship will sink," it's easy to see icebergs in the fog (even when they don't exist).

Ironically, I could have "gone doomer" if the data ever amounted to a reasonable case. But lacking the appropriate bias (towards doom), I never found enough to become truly concerned.

Brian, I am wounded. Marianne is busy trying to write a "book" out of the dregs of last year. I'm just enjoying a casual conversation at the corner pub. Remember, Brian, I just don't take this all that seriously.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 30, 2000.

>> Brian, I am wounded. <<

You don't fool me one bit, Mr. Ken Decker! I see those puckers at the corners of your mouth.

>> I'm just enjoying a casual conversation at the corner pub. <<

So, does that mean we are engaged in a sort of jest-in-time delivery process?

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), March 30, 2000.

Cherri: I realize you are dyslexic, but for the 10th time:

"AisA" was another poster, not me. He is the one who wanted to see a 10+ ASAP.

"@@@.@" was also another poster (now "Hawk").

psychopathetic: Is "payback a bitch"? I dunno. I said all along that the main difference between pollies and doomers was that pollies hoped the doomers were wrong, and the doomers hoped the pollies were right. I hope you are as happy with the outcome as I am. Somehow, you don't seem to be. What seems to be the problem?

Deano: Things are going well. Need any canned soup?

-- a (a@a.a), March 30, 2000.

a

You made me laugh out loud dude!!! I appreciate that tremendously!

Glad you're doing OK.

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), March 30, 2000.

"ahhhhhhhhhh":

pollies hopedKNEW the doomers were wrong, and the doomers hoped the pollies were right.

Make sure you don't rewrite history...."dude".

-- CMFR (bug@up.yur.ass), April 02, 2000.

'a' is lurking here? Hi, 'a'!

You needn't feel shy, 'a'. Feel free to post using your original 'a' handle on ANY thread. It's good to see you posting, but it's much better to see you posting under a recognizable name.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.thingee), April 03, 2000.

a@a.a is HERE!?! WHOOO hoooo!!!

Now all we need is scotty lehman (flameaway), Ray, and Invar....

THEN we could have a proper "doomer roast".

-- (don't@forget.andy&brettmiklos), April 10, 2000.