[were the GI's attempting to "UN-GI"?] Do we have really have a reason to be alarmed?

Interesting that those who would revise history and tell us that not everyone thought y2k was going to be "bad" on TB, didn't chime in on this thread. They certainly had their chance, didn't they?

-- (whateverh@ppened.to), July 03, 2000

Answers

Interesting. So what?

-- (nemesis@awol.com), July 03, 2000.

A few weeks after that thread, the Senate's Y2k committee released the first of its two major reports on Y2k.

Quotably Quoted - What the 2/99 Senate Report Really Said...

http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003HW8

I suppose you think the Senate blew its chance, too, but remember you 're talking about early 1999 here. The NERC did not claim 99% readiness for the U.S. power biz until August of last year. But in August, 1999, many other major firms were still saying they would not get all of their critical Y2k work done in time.

Fewer Than Half of Major Firms Anticipate Full Year 2000 Compliance in Critical Systems by Year's End

http://www.usa.capgemini.com/news/pr99.asp?id=104

-- *When* good news became available (was@important.too), July 04, 2000.