A friend forwarded this to me today. Comments anyone?

BN: BestWire January 11, 1999 Monday Government Sees Progress on Y2K

WASHINGTON (BEST'S NEWS) - The President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion is increasingly confident that there won't be large-scale disruptions from the dreaded computer bug, but the council also said there is much work still to be done.

The council, formed last year to coordinate the government's response to the Y2K computer problem, will deliver quarterly reports this year on government and private industry efforts to correct the computer software problem that leaves many computers incapable of properly reading the year 2000.

The insurance industry is concerned about the potential cost in claims, and the business community is concerned about potential business interruptions because of the glitch. Estimates of the cost to correct the problem--and of potential losses after the fact--run into the hundreds of billion of dollars.

But there is some room for optimism, council Chairman John Koskinen said.

"Based on the data we have seen thus far, we are increasingly confident that there will not be large-scale disruptions among banks and in the power and telecommunications industries," Koskinen said. "But one thing is clear: everyone has a lot of work left to do. We are most concerned about organizations that don't have the Y2K problem as a high priority. They are the source of our greatest risk."

The council is especially concerned about the small-business community and smaller governments. There is concern about international power and telecommunications failures that could affect cross-border operations. There is the possibility of some small outages in the United States, officials say.

The council is assessing the Y2K preparedness of a number of industries. Periodic reports will be released on the council's web site at www.y2k.gov. Persons interested in calling the council can reach it at (888) USA-4-Y2K. While the government's efforts are likely to ease some concerns of the business and insurance communities, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is still calling on Congress to approve more legislation to aid the business community in avoiding lawsuits because of the computer problem.

"The bill passed by Congress in 1998, the Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure Act, which allowed companies to share information, was only a first step. Now we need strong legislation that encourages problem-solving and we urge the legal profession to join us in this effort," said Lawrence Kraus, president of the Chamber's Institute for Legal Reform, an organization dedicated to reducing excessive and frivolous lawsuits.

"Under no circumstances should this problem be exploited to the detriment of America's high-tech companies, consumers or businesses that rely on computer systems," he said.

BN-NJ-01-11-99 1617ET #25984 BNviaNewsEDGE

Copyright (c) 1999 A.M. Best Company, Inc. Received via NewsEDGE from Desktop Data, Inc.: 01/11/99 16:21:48

Subjects: INSU

-- Libby Alexander (libbyalex@aol.com), January 12, 1999

Answers

If you go to the National Guard site and read Realisms, it appears that Kosky and the Guard are not on the same wave length.

-- Linda A. (adahi@muhlon.com), January 12, 1999.

The most relevant words in this article say it all.

"The President's Council. . . will deliver. . . reports. . ."

The question is still, "Are they credible reports"?

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), January 12, 1999.

I understand Flint and Koskinen are cousins.

-- a (a@a.a), January 12, 1999.

And I suppose we are brothers, right a? Frankly, a lot of good reports are coming in, I don't think we should be gloomy at good news. Now if they would just get my *&#*&)(* phone line fixed so it won't go out in two or three hours I would be a happy man!

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), January 12, 1999.

Paulyanna,

You are confusing good PR reports with good news. They are most definitely NOT the same thing. But keep chanting "all will be well." It will keep you calm and relaxed (for a little while longer, anyway).

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), January 12, 1999.

Paul... You should change your web name to: nay@sayer.com... or perhaps... grasping@straws.com

-- Vic Parker (francisco@d'anconia.com), January 12, 1999.

An honest effort to distinguish between good PR and good news is certainly a challenge. Most good PR reports contain at least some basis in fact, although the applied spin makes it tough to disentangle. Most bad reports ultimately derive from sources with a vested interest in things being bad, presenting the same challenge.

Beyond this, I doubt that calling people names and trying to make them look stupid, scores points anywhere except in the minds of schoolyard bullies. I have yet to see any original, useful contribution made to any forum by anyone whose goal appears to be to 'win', at what they think is a game. Certainly this attitude is the enemy of anything resembling clear thinking.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 12, 1999.

One tires, Flint, of obvious efforts to impart a positive spin to negative news. There are those among us who do not dwell incessantly on efforts to seek out the inherent goodness in us all; to take up someone else's battle; to be so damn meddlesome. There is sufficient information on this forum for each of us to study the issues, weigh the merits of all points, and then make our own decisions. Few of us, I think, need an arbiter such as Paul, to leaven our opinions with his take on the matter. I would lend more credence to his remarks if he occasionally left the Pollyanna approach at the door.

-- Ross (I'll make up my own@mind.com), January 12, 1999.

Cant we all just get along? Articles such as the one presented above contain more opinion than fact. They may have some factual basis. However, the data that confirms any factual basis was not shared with us in the piece. Whether or not you believe the opinion is up to you.

-- Sue (Conibear@gateway.net), January 12, 1999.

Ross, almost every post to this forum is someone's 'take' on the situation. Why single out one of them (and in the minority at that) as being tiresome?

Making up your own mind is great. But be careful your opinion doesn't ossify, blinding you to any change in status contrary to that opinion. There are some people here (thankfully not many) who have been reduced to labeling all good news as lies, and mocking those who post it. This is a sad trap to fall into.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 12, 1999.

If it's good news, I want to know if it's a fact. If it's bad news, I want to know if it's a fact. That's all any one us want, is the truth whether it be good or bad. But, even fact came become all muddled with rebuttals. Reading all the different posts on any given subject here, I'm reading only speculation, heresay, maybe, probably, could be, should be, is, isn't, and so on. I asked a question earlier "What Frustrates You The Most?" And I guess this is one of my frustrations, knowing what is fact or fallacy. Maybe none of us will really find out until it really happens (or doesn't happen).

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), January 12, 1999.

the nice part about Koskinen, is that you can generally tell when he's lying, because his lips are moving...sorta like his boss...

or to put it another way:

"If a ruler pays attention to lies, all of his servants become wicked." Proverbs 29:12

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), January 13, 1999.

Koskinen is a goddamn lying shill and should be strung up when the dust settles.

I feel a lot better now :)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), January 13, 1999.

Look,

Half of you probably didn't read the first line of the report, the other half couldn't understand it. Ok, now that is out, here is a little contradiction that I found.

"most are significantly behind the United States in efforts to prepare critical systems for the new millennium. Awareness remains especially low among developing countries. Lack of progress on the international front may lead to failures that could affect the United States, especially in areas that rely upon cross-border networks such as finance, telecommunications, and transportation"

AND

"Telecommunications companies engaged in trans-border services indicate that neither dial tone nor data transmission are likely to experience significant difficulties resulting from the Y2K problem"

So where is he telling the truth. Is international Telecomminication ready or not???? That is one lie, if you ready closely, you will find others.

MB

-- MB (Bonnermc@hotmail.com), January 13, 1999.

We need scapegoats! We need scapegoats!

-- Scape Chicken (tears@smile.net), January 13, 1999.

MB, to me it is a plain lie indeed. One only has to read the 10Q's of those telecom companies to see that they are saying the opposite.

I've posted links and paragraphs on telecoms Y2K reports to SEC on this thread. You'll see plainly that they don't "indicate" that they will not "experience significant difficulties."

Kosniken is saying on this report that red is green, and he is counting on your color-vision deficiency and that you'll miss the fact that the green/red/yellow lights are in different positions.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), January 13, 1999.

Wait a minute here. Let's try this again. We read:

'Lack of progress on the international front may lead to failures ... especially in areas that rely upon cross-border networks such as finance, telecommunications, and transportation'

BUT

'neither dial tone nor data transmission are likely to experience significant difficulties'

Hey, we're dealing with probabilities here. Nobody has a crystal ball.

When the weatherman says 'it may rain but it's not likely', is he contradicting himself? Is he lying? Is he trying to keep the 'real' weather a secret from us? Give me a break.

Koskinen's job is to radiate cautious optimism publicly, while applying as much pressure as possible on the laggards, behind the scenes. He's playing for time here. This strategy is very likely to backfire pretty soon, but it's the strategy he's paid to follow right now. Sometimes you need to realize that just because a bad situation cannot be avoided, doesn't mean that a worse one can't either. Koskinen's job is to try to prevent a bad situation from becoming worse. Nobody will ever know if he did it or not, because only one future awaits us and there'll be no other future to compare it to. Not a job most of us would accept, I know.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 13, 1999.