Y2K on ABC today/tomorrow

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

I just caught the tailend of ABC news. They said Y2K would be featured on either Nightline tonight or Evening News tommorow...anybody know which?

-- ed carraway (carrawae@anubis.nosc.mil), October 20, 1998


From the abc.com website--

Coming up on


Tuesday, October 20

Technology Correspondent Gina Smith asks how serious is the Y2K problem?

-- anon (anon@anon.com), October 20, 1998.

And here's a bold prediction for the future:

After the show airs, the transcript will be available at

http://www.abcnews.com/onair/worldnewstonight/ transcripts/ntl_981020_trans.html

I'm betting my life on it.

-- anon (anon@anon.com), October 20, 1998.

hey anon-

why the anonimity? did not want to enter real name, or would rather not announce to rest of net that you associate with what some identify as kooks?

just curious....

-- anon2@anon2.anon2 (anon2@anon2.anon2), October 20, 1998.

...Or maybe it'll be at

http://www.abcnews.com/onair/nightline/ transcripts/ntl_981020_trans.html


Hey, at least I closed all my HTML tags...

-- anon (anon@anon.com), October 20, 1998.

all i get is a HTML error

-- anon2 (anon2@anon2.anon2), October 20, 1998.

You get an HTML error now because the show has not aired yet, therefore it has not been transcribed yet, therefore it's not there yet.

Anonymity can be good. It leads people to judge your statements on their merits rather than on your perceived identity.

-- anon (anon@anon.com), October 20, 1998.

Then again, you could use a nonsense sounding name (Mine is well known to folks who know me in the 'real world') and a bullsh*t address, and let your ideas stand or fall on their own merit. You would have the added burden of sounding consistant from one post to the next, however, unlike anon, anon 1, anon 2, anon3, etc.

Just my semi-anon $.02 worth.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), October 20, 1998.

That's a good idea. I'll do it. Starting now.

I'll even "set a persistent cookie" for my new identity.

--"What'd you do last night?" --"Oh, the usual, set a persistent cookie, that sort of thing."

Unfortunately, this message board lets anyone post under any name and address they choose, so you can always just pretend to be someone else.

Then again, maybe that's fortunate. If you ever said something really stupid, you could just defend yourself with "Hey, that wasn't me."

-- BellaVita (red@tablewine.com), October 20, 1998.

yes but red, i can tell from the way you post you are anon@anon.com. I think you are really Cory Hamasaki and Uncle Deedah is actually Paul Milne after he has taken his nightly tranquilizer...

-- a (a@a.a), October 20, 1998.

I am indeed anon@anon.com. But I cannot claim the pleasure of being Cory Hamasaki. If you doubt this, please watch my posts over the coming months and note that I will never, ever tell you what I had for lunch.

-- BellaVita (red@tablewine.com), October 20, 1998.

And I am polite to a fault, nary an evil word passes these virginal lips, unlike others who I have been likened to.

Jeez, I wonder if this will p!ss off Paul?

"Hey Bevis, he said virgin, huh huh huh"

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), October 20, 1998.

I actually owe Milne some money... I think I'll borrow a little from deJager to pay him back.

(Get it? Raise your hand if you get it!)

-- BellaVita (red@tablewine.com), October 20, 1998.

It WAS on Nightline. The thing that I found amusing was that Mr. Koskinen read almost every response he made. If you watched his eyes it was obvious that he was reading a script.

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), October 21, 1998.

I wasn't watching his eyes, but I was struck by the fact that Koskinen does not move his head AT ALL when he speaks. Try doing this sometime--it's extremly difficult! It was almost like one of those "moving lips" bits on the Conan O'Brien show. Whether or not he was actually reading his responses, they were certainly very polished and scripted. The man's a pro.

Still, although I would have liked to see Ted Koppel instead of Forrest Sawyer, it seemed like they were at least starting to take Y2k seriously and talking to some of the right people.

-- BellaVita (red@tablewine.com), October 21, 1998.

I found it interesting that Mr. Koskinen was able to answer the questions SO FAST. Almost like he had a pat answer for every question. Also he did not say that Scott Olmstead was a nutso, just that it was too early to make such radical preps. (Wait until you're screwed, then prepare)

Observation 2, although the doomers were featured first and gave a good account of themselves, there was no back and forth, Koskinen had the show to himself.

Deedahs bottom line, word is leaking out, albeit slowly and with a fringe spin

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), October 21, 1998.

Not time for Nightline yet...another 90 minutes..I'm salivating...

By the way, I post real email address and don't have too many cranks......must be cos what I say is mush, right?

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), October 21, 1998.

Yeah Donna, but if you had a Model T you'd want all those cranks...

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (cook.r@csaatl.com), October 21, 1998.


When all is sweetness and light, you have said it best and right.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), October 21, 1998.

Oh, my Uncle...you have wooed me well...and I await the strange visual experience called Nightline, for further enlightenment.(sotto voce LOL )

The surreal is here...or as Paul Simon says:

"These are the days of miracle and wonder, This is the long distance call,... The way the camera follows us in slo-mo, the way we look to us all.... The way we look to a distant constellation that is dying in the corner of the sky...

These are the days of miracle and wonder and don't cry baby, don't cry don't cry, don't cry.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), October 21, 1998.


Maybe the cranks like the mush for breakfast with bananas on the side with rye toast....S'okay with me, the message is everything! The reception I cannot control.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), October 21, 1998.

Koskinen is still blathering... and I have to post...."liar, liar, pants on fire,....Koskinen! The Olmsteds, amd Carmichael were closer to the mark...Forgive me, but Olmsted,..I know his name but can't place his computer expertise...they also quoted and photographed Jim Lord...with quote...

Koskinen is lying when he says risk is with smaller cities...he is lying with a robotic face...Risk is to the feds....my city will be a lot closer than , better prepared than, the feds....

anyone else have comments? I am delighted in the coverage an tatally disgusted with the so-called federal representative. AND I am not surprised.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), October 21, 1998.


My husband and I also watched Koskinen on Nightline but arrived at a somewhat different conclusion. He appeared to us to have memorized his answers and to be verifying that the teleprompter was displaying the "correct" information! Eye of the Beholder and such, I guess. . .


Your notice of Koskinen's "robotic" appearance struck a chord--we wondered out loud if he might be an android (jokingly) but there is no doubt that his appearance was not "normal".

In our opinion, his performance gives meaning to the phrase, "lying with a straight face."

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), October 21, 1998.

So I guess the salient question on this thread is:

Is R. Daneel Koskinen Y2K Compliant? Or will he be replaced by a PC platform czardroid in 14 months?


1.A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human to come to harm. 2.A robot must obey orders given to him by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3.A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

The Three Laws of Robotics --- Isaac Asimov

-- Hallyx (Hallyx@aol.com), October 21, 1998.


That tears it! Since ALL robots are governed by the Three Laws, the behavior of our government functionaries (elected and otherwise) rules them out! Oh damn. . .

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), October 21, 1998.

Yeah, Donna, I was also surprised at the serious tone of the Nightline presentation. Nobody made even the slightest fun of the Olmsteads (I couldn't find the website he referred to). I didn't recognise the name.

It was kind of nice putting faces on Rick Cowles, Doug Carmicheal and others.

Sawyer's opening comments were worth the price of admission. All in all a unexpectedly good first effort for the commercial broadcast media.


"We put the egg of civilization in one basket, woven from fibers of virtual reality and suspended by an electrical cord." --- Allen Comstock

-- Hallyx (Hallyx@aol.com), October 21, 1998.

So, I wasn't the only one who noticed that that guy's head never moved!!! It was really creepy. But, I must say, he DID NOT make fun of doomsayers or say that they were wrong to prepare. He did say that everyone has to make up their own mind. I was expecting a more adamant or aggresive stand against doomsayers from him. I think between that show and Dr. Dobson's coverage (I just heard the first part a few minutes ago) that it won't be long before people really catch on.

-- madeline (runner@bcpl.net), October 21, 1998.

Uncle: I obviously utilize a fake name. My real name received a few nasty e-mails about 6 mo. ago and I learned my lesson. If I have some information which I feel I can be considered knowledgeable of, a rare occurrence, then I will provide an actual name and address.

Hallyx: Love the quotes along with the posts.

When do you think awareness will turn into either a television mini-series or a new disaster film? It is inevitible (see The Siege) after something begins to slide into the mainstream.

-- Slick (slick@hucheemama.com), October 21, 1998.

Slick, there is a movie on (NBC, I think) this coming Sunday night called Thirst.(?) It has nothing to do with Y2K, just people trying to survive without water. Might be interesting. It will probably make me want to store MORE water! :-)

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), October 21, 1998.

Darn, the first night in three weeks I go to bed early and I miss something important.

Hey, I can't get this url to work. Any other options on how to get the transcript?

Mr. Koskinen is going to be on CNBC's PowerLunch shortly (10/21/98) I'm planning on taping it and viewing it over and over again to see if I can see little 1's and 0's flashing across his eyes. Maybe he'll suffer an early y2k glitch and collapse on the program. That might get people scared, huh?

Mike ___________________________________________________________

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), October 21, 1998.

Scott Olmstead is one of the original "alarmists", which just means he analyzed the available data and decided that "we are about to take on water, Cap'n." He wrote a cogent response to the rather tired "the free market will save us all" stance of one Harry Browne (Libertarian and denial-head extraordinaire); said response is described by Gary North as the Y2K debate equivalent of "Bambi Meets Godzilla." Olmstead runs the prepare4Y2k Website, has been profiled in "Wired" magazine, and has been doing his level best to get his readers to GET THE HECK MOVING AND PREPARE! Good place to start: http://www.prepare4y2k.com/980809.htm

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.com), October 21, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ