If you thought the Time article was poor journalism (and IMHO, it was), you'll get a real hoot out of this one. It is actually far worse and accomplishes the task with far fewer words. Here's what the 'wise old owl' has to say...

http://www.impressionmag.com/y2k.html

Three steps forward, two steps back

-- Arnie Rimmer (arnie_rimmer@usa.net), February 03, 1999

Answers

Great article, thanks for the post.

TM

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), February 03, 1999.

The smart thing to do in 1999 (see "de Jager") is to hedge Y2K dangers so you're not labelled a kook. Period. I think it will turn out that the Vanity Fair article represented not the beginning but the high-water mark of responsible media coverage. It's downhill from there.

I stick by my prediction that there will be no mass panic before October 1999, at the earliest, and probably not before mid-January, 2000. If the utilities stay up in US, no panic before mid-February when the supply chain starts to unravel.

The October-December uncertainty in my prediction is entirely dependent on how many Americans actually withdraw money and how much they withdraw.

You see, it's smart not to panic.

This doesn't mean there won't be a gradually increasing level of physical preparation going on behind the scenes, even by many DGIs. That's hedging too. And smart.

Hey, as Cory says, "I'm clueless." Yeah, me too.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 03, 1999.

That's pitiful. Some of the lamest trolls in this forum have written pieces that look like Encyclopedia Britannica articles compared to that drivel.

-- Puddintame (dit@dot.com), February 03, 1999.

I know it most likely wont happen, but I certainly hope that folks who publish that sort of thing are eventually held accountable for it.

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), February 03, 1999.

According to the article, there are 4 types of animals that best depicts what type of person you are. Are you a "chicken little," someone who runs around yelling that the sky is falling? Are you a rooster who is constantly crowing about the severity of the situation and your out to make a buck with scare tactics. Are you a wise owl, someone who actually studies the problem? Lastly, are you an ostrich, someone who sticks his head in the sand ignoring the problem. According to Tom Oleson, Research Director of IDC, if your a "chicken little," your the most dangerous! He also calls Art Bell a Y2K lunatic. The article was nothing but a bunch of bull crap! But here you all go, a Y2K expert who has studied and researched Y2K and nothing is going to happen that will bring down the economy.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), February 03, 1999.

I dunno, I thought his mention of the bird categorization system was kind of cute...

-RCat

Three pilgrims were traveling together in the desert. They came to a dead dog, whose body was rotting in the road. "How horribly disgusting, the flies, the smell, it's just revolting!", said the first two travelers. The third, a Sufi, said nothing. An hour later, the three still on the road, the Sufi said "the teeth in that dog's skull sparkled in the sun and gleamed so beautifully..."

-- Runway Cat (Runway_Cat@hotmail.com), February 03, 1999.

Wow. Do I feel relieved!

Someone's studied the Y2K issue and is convinced we'll be okay. What did the wise one study?

Wonder if he sees beyound his four walls and lone computer screen? Clearly he missed the global interdependencies issues. Too small to be considered "important."

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), February 03, 1999.

Careful, Artemis. Next thing you know, you'll be wearing a (tm) DOOMBROOD Jacket!!

LOL!!

-- Chuck, night driver (rienzoo@en.com), February 03, 1999.

Arlin, you've got a point about the vocal pollyannas and their eventual accountability. Maybe they know what they're talking about, if not there will eventually be a prosecutor, a lynch mob or a higher power that they'll have to answer to.

Likewise, if one hunkers down in silence, will he escape the lynch mob? Spouting a lie is not far removed from hiding the truth. Don't cover your light with a bushel.

-- Puddintame (dit@dot.com), February 03, 1999.

The facile logic in this article is precious indeed! And we've seen it enough already to dismiss it out-of-hand.

By this wise old owl's reasoning, skyscraper's don't need proper foundations, because they only might collapse, not because they will collapse.

National defense is unnecessary because we only might be attacked by a foreign power, not because we will be attacked by a foreign power.

Storing some of the harvest each year is a waste of time because we only might have a drought, not because we will have a drought.

His interpretation of might is what he thinks the odds are, based on an obviously superficial inspection of the situation.

Little that has been publicly posted anywhere supports his conclusions and no sources are given to support any of the assertions in this article. Instead, we have your typical smart-a** bluster and a cutesy, condescending link to survival domes. A waste of everyone's time.

Stage one denial.

-- Nathan (nospam@al.com), February 03, 1999.

Ignorance is no disgrace, but it's no great honor either. Plus it can be hazardous to your health.

Refusal to learn, now, that is disgraceful. Likewise telling lies for your employer.

Is Rick Chandler a dunce? a refusenik? or a shill? (Circle all that apply.)

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 03, 1999.

Chuck - where do I get a jacket ?!
What do they have... Gore-Tex lining ... ?

-- Grrr (grrr@grrr.net), February 03, 1999.

AND, as several people would point out, to be a good and faithful watchman requires......

Chuck

-- Chuck, night driver (rienzoo@en.com), February 03, 1999.

Gore-Tex ? No, Grrrr, they are made by Second Chance !

-- Blue Himalayan (bh@k2.y), February 03, 1999.

Uh, Kevlar, actually. Doesn't breathe worth a darn, but sheds much more than rain... 8-}]

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.com), February 03, 1999.

I sure am glad to hear that their is not going to be a major failure in the year 2000. I guess that coal that did not get delivered to 2 power companies during the Union and Southern pacific merger (when the computers were working normally) did not matter either. And of course who is counting the 350,000 car per day pile up for 3 months the merger created. Of course that is not what the judge said today when he awarded the utility company damages. That wont happen after Y2k. I guess the Y2k failures that I have personally witnessed at 4 of the largest telecommunications companies where I have been working on the Y2k project did not happen either. I guess the utility industry is really farther along than the 34% the published to the SEC through 10Q's. (I know they are saving the good news till the end for a big finish!) Everything is just rosey! Go ahead and think that way polly I still need more supplies. I do not want a panic buying spree either.

-- Steve Watson (swatson1@gte.net), February 03, 1999.

I sent a request to that guy to cite his sources for 99.9% compliancy. I'll post his reply,that is if I get one. (aint gonna hold my breath)

-- King of Free Estimates (Isdisgusted@again.&again), February 03, 1999.

While the writer did mention the power grid I am SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO tired of obfuscational tactics. Most people including myself are NOT, I REPEAT are NOT concerned of Y2K issues because of elevators; VCR's or frigin popcorn poppers. Also, Y2K has NOTHING to do with the end of the Millenium. This is not the "end is near" simply because we are rolling into 2000. How fucking (excuse me) arrogant these writers are to belittle VERY legitimate concerns by trying to focus attention on cultism and chicken little.............Rant Off

-- CP (Spoonman@prodigy.net), February 03, 1999.

I happen to agree that the article took the lighter side of Y2K. But why don't you guys quit your complaining, go work for a university, get grant money, and do research (legitimately) on Y2K conversion progress? Until then all your moaning and flaming won't make the problem go away or make anybody feel any better.

TM

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), February 03, 1999.

OH, so the power companies are going to spend about 50% of their Y2K budget fixing the last .013% of the problem. Makes sense to me.

-- Sysman (still_worried@y2k.net), February 03, 1999.

"Until then all your moaning and flaming won't make the problem go away or make anybody feel any better."

I disagree. It does make me feel better, not only to complain, but also to read other people's reactions. I don't think I'm alone, judging from the number of responses to these threads. If people aren't supposed to voice their frustration here, where are we supposed to? I'm totally isolated from GI's in the non-virtual world. If we bottled up this frustration, we'd just go (even more) insane.

-- d (d@dgi.com), February 03, 1999.

Sneaky Mac

Here is a good one for ya, and I swear its true.

Seems that a fellow was issued a Kevlar vest, and he was unsure of its ability to shed more than water. So this genius asks his buddy to test it out before hand, you know, see if it would work. So Einstein hands his buddy a nice sharp knife and says Here stab me with this.

Yup, right inna heart. Maybe that Darwin guy wasnt too far off base after all ;)

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), February 03, 1999.