What The Goverment ALREADY Knows That We Don'tgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
The Government ALREADY knows within a reasonable margin of error whether they systems will be Y2K compliant, Y2K ready, or Y2K braindead.
BTW, they probably have just made or are on the cusp of making their final judgments about action plans, based on that fact. A recent report of Koskinen briefing Clinton probably set that in motion. It may be unfortunate that Bill is feeling so, um, up these days.
Everything that is done, spun or planned over the next 10 months will be based on that cold assessment. For instance:
Will Medicare make it .... or not?
Will missile systems and other military-critical systems make it .... or not?
Le me rephrase that: how reduced will U.S. military capability be and for how long?
Will the IRS make it ....?
Will the Treasury make it ... ?
Will the Fed make it ... ?
Will the FAA make it ... ?
Will the FBI make it ... ?
Will the post office make it ... ?
make it ... ?
They can't wait to find out. GI?
While we are ferreting out and acting on very imperfect information (and sifting out disinformation) that leaks through, the government will now begin to act on a hard judgment of its internal situation.
Since agencies defend themselves against each other as well as against us, expect disinformation within/between the government too.
BTW, we will begin to see something similar taking place with the Fortune 500 and especially the Fortune 100.
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 09, 1999
BD, I have no doubt that what you say is on the money. Heads of government and big business are in a position to know the score right now. As I've said in earlier posts, the Titans are now struggling to save their position among the gods and we are mere bystanders. There will be very little documentary evidence of the true status, but rest assured that the Koskinens of the world have passed at least one paper to each relevant Titan stating whether we probably will or probably will not make it. There will probably be only one or two copies of each of these documents. The Koskinens of the world will have them in their fireproof safe deposit boxes so when the trials occur, they can present evidence on their behalf.
At least these trials will be all in English so Clinton and the others won't have to wear those silly looking headphones reminiscent of Nuremburg.
-- Puddintame (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.
Big Dog, It's not just disinformation between agencies, but between layers of government. So the information that filters its way to the top ranks and perhaps assumed by the top officials to be accurate will be rosier than reality and reflected in inadequate contingency plans. And of course, anything we hear will be even more watered down. The posts that I value the most on these forums have been the in-the-trenches testimonials. Please, folks, keep them coming.
-- Brooks (email@example.com), February 09, 1999.
Misinformation is going on alright. A close to home example: my spouse works for the FAA doing computer support. Spouse's boss told upper management that their department was compliant when in fact only some parts of the system were compliant. (Evidently, boss thought it okay to lie because "the rest of the system would be ready on time.") On time and government in the same sentence-isn't that a contradiction in terms? Spouse would lose job if this were known. Spouse did informal survey yesterday of 4 techies. 2 said nothing's gonna happen, 1 said, 'wife always has 6 months of food stored' and 1 (the y2k rep for his department) says he's taking lots of $ out of the bank and converting stocks to cash.
doing lots of prep but still- Scared spitless
-- scaredspitless (can'tsaywho@this time.com), February 09, 1999.
New Forum Readers,
This is an interesting thread if you are trying to evaluate the conspiratorial theories being bounced about. According to Big Dog the top conspiracists already know how bad Y2k will be. Yet, we are also told on this thread that the leaders are NOT getting accurate information. If you want to be part of the dialogue and you are a GI you won't be able to "go along to get along" on this thread because two conflicting positions have already been posted.
IMHO, I have to side with the opinion that the leadership is NOT getting enough meaningful information to have a clue how bad things WILL be and they are left with SWAGS just like the rest of us.
-- Woe Is Me (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.
Woe --- good catch! I was dimly aware as I posted it that I was including, if not a contradiction, a major nuance but I should have been more alert in spelling it out.
There is a push-pull, IMO, between what the top-level of the government (say, White House and joint chiefs) need to know (from their point of view) and the quality of the info they themselves may be getting from their agencies. This certainly impacts on the nature of their own contingency planning.
In other words, don't think we're the only ones trying to evaluate the quality of government info. Whether you like or hate Klinton, he's got exactly the same problem. Kind of funny, in a way.
For all we know, Bill tunes in to Yourdon himself. Hmm, wonder what name he posts under .....
I do stand by the essential point: with 10 months to go, the government has to make its own best guess ASAP and plan accordingly from this point out.
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 09, 1999.
I think we're giving the high mucky-mucks too much credit for understanding this issue. Sure, they're aware that things *might* crap out. But as already mentioned, as progress reports move up the chain of command, they get spun with a more and more optimistic outlook.
Also, the guys at the top are from the pre-IT world of business and gov't. They understand that IT has made things run more efficiently, but they really don't understand the nuts and bolts of how it works. I wouldn't be suprised if a lot of these guys genuinely feel most things will be fixed in time, mostly because their trusted advisors, who are fearful for their jobs, keep saying so.
This, of course, doesn't detract one iota from their willingness to be completely dishonest with the public. I just think they haven't reached the stage yet where they realize how dishonest they're being.
-- rick blaine (email@example.com), February 09, 1999.
I've got to say that as a Y2K project director who speaks with some of the Y2K managers in other Fortune 500 companies, a lot of these guys aren't coders - they're managers getting drift/spin from their managers beneath them. I disagree with your assessment that these guys are "in the know." When I talk with them, they aren't. There's a big disconnect called CYA. The grunts and the middle managers aren't exactly doing up-fronts with these guys. The Y2K managers, for the most part, still ride the notion of the "Long Boom" - they still think Y2K is not a computer problem, but a management problem. And they say to themselves, "I'm a good manager, right?"
Overarching the whole thing is that almost to a person, you hear, "We're not so much concerned about our own stuff - we're worried about our trading partners." I think this sets up the following scenario, which is already widely practiced. It's called finger-pointing. "Uh, I'm not sure why the computers are down, but we're looking into it. It's probably data we got from XYZ corporation yesterday. We're looking into it."
Don't be so sure these guys know what's going on. They're just following the Plan. You know, that mindset that says hard work + good management = big bucks. So I disagree - these guys aren't so greatly in the know. Rarely do I run across a GI in this turf. They've barely heard of de Jager or Yardeni. One week at a Y2K meeting, they were wondering how to get information about their suppliers and I had to explain EDGAR searches and give them www.yardeni.com as one way to get 10-Q data. They're really stuck in the four walls of their company and barely starting to think of the chain reaction involved here.
Waiting for that shoe to drop...
-- Brett (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.
Brett -- if I understand your point, you're saying Clinton/Chiefs as well as Fortune 100 don't really have a clue but will just proceed on whatever plan suits their political and CYA fantasies?
How is your Y2K remediation coming?
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 09, 1999.
Brett, I agree with you that management guys aren't in the know, it's been stated by a whole lot of people in the trenches already. But exactly because this issue is so confusing and controversial, Clinton would have to put his investigators at work to dig out a better picture. That's why I don't see it as farfetched what Bigdog said about Clinton reading this forum. Ok, not himself, but his men could very well be. As well as monitoring every other y2k sites and forums.
I believe that Koskinen is only an appointed figure head on Y2K, a spokesperson as his real job. I believe that Clinton is getting briefed by CIA men or whoever, hard at work night and day. Spying not only the internet, but on major infrastructures also. Were I in his shoes, that's what I'd do. He's already aware of the collapse Y2K could cause if not remediated on time, he doesn't need to be a geek to understand that, and take action.
-- Chris (email@example.com), February 09, 1999.
Chris, I agree. The spooks are working on this big-time, both with respect to domestic and international. Prophecy is what they're paid for.
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 09, 1999.
The US Govt knows far more than they are letting on to the public.
See thread below to be clued into some plans for sleeping JQP:
Military Test Exercises For "Urban Warrior" & National Institute for Urban Search and Rescue Web-Site
xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx
-- Leska (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.
BigDog and Chris,
Yes, you're right it's my opinion that the business guys don't know, but I think within the next six months they'll figure it out. Most of these guys see Y2K bringing no greater than a 5 on the WDCY2K Richter scale - no recession, just annoying and "Oh, look at the poor third-world country." However, some of these guys are starting to think the developing nations scenarios through, and that's bothering them a lot more than U.S. business.
As for Clinton, two things make me wonder how deeply Clinton gets it. One is his State of the Union Address, in which he very nearly laughed it off. I think if he was believing this was more serious, he would have used the opportunity to let us know it's not only a "big, big problem," but also a serious problem too.
The second issue is that Clinton has very little clout with the Republicans, a.k.a. the majority in both houses of Congress. He also has no standing with our military for being such a glaring hypocrite and "in your face" with UCMJ. I seriously doubt his ability to do much of anything. His power is in the polls which is based on everyone's wallet. Think it through: if the economy turns south Clinton can't blame anyone - the Republicans have been leading the charge on Y2K and he and his technological farce of a VP, a.k.a. Barney Fife, haven't done squat. Once the economy tanks later this year, Clinton will have no support with the American people. Yes, his "support" is now 20 miles wide, but it's one inch deep. The Republicans would never let Clinton take martial control of our country. And even if they could do nothing about it, I'm sure we as a people wouldn't let him. Who would trust him? The military won't back him.
I think it's irrelevant how much those in the government get it. They'll still say/do little, in my opinion.
The one thing that does bother me in this is how hard these leaders are sticking to their "official future," as Douglass Carmichael puts it. They aren't willing to believe they might have to change the Plan. Which means one of two things for me: either they'll panic like hell in the end of this year, or they'll coerce whatever pressure they'll need to keep their plans for the future. The former doesn't worry me - the second one frightens the hell out of me. I think this is what you are speaking of. But I'm banking on Clinton's shallow standing with Americans to prevent him from having any forcible power. Maybe I'm naive... but then it wasn't long ago that I read that section of the Declaration of Independence. Like someone said then, it was as treasonous then as it is today.
Watching the tap dance...
-- Brett (email@example.com), February 09, 1999.
This is a real example in company XXX. During Y2K assessment, system glitchsRus is estimated to take 2000 manhours of remediation. After 400 manhours have been expended, Lilly, the blonde bombshell coder geek from Carnegie Mellon, uncovers a nasty interface problem with 12 other systems. A quick survey shows that this is going to at least double the time required. However, all Percent completed reporting by the section managers continues to use the original 2000 hour estimate. So at 1000 hours its reported to the Higher Powers of Management (hornhairs all) that the vital glitchsRus system is 50% complete instead of the more realistic 25%. So why did the section managers report things this way - because their bonuses depended on it! From what I can tell, this is not an unusual state of affairs. Later, the section managers can claim the interfaces are not really a part of the individual sysytem. Shortsighted and fatal.....
-- RD. ->H (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.
BD, Chris, et al:
as someone who, as a young NCO during a previous democratic administration, was once faced the threat of being courtmartialed for telling the truth (didn't know they'd already told the powers that were that the true situation not only wouldn't happen, but *couldn't* happen)I'm afraid I have to side with the folks who say that billy jeff and company probably are NOT getting accurate information.
just my 2 cents' worth, Arlin
-- Arlin H. Adams (email@example.com), February 09, 1999.
I agree with BD. If the gov. doesn't have the spooks on the job I would be absolutely amazed. I have to believe that the powers that be are getting reports from many sources other than official statements. This is obviously a threat to national security. The sudden interest in terrorism is a rather bad cover story for Y2K prep. IMHO.
I really wish that people would quit assuming that the government is so inept that it can't pull off secret ops. It simply isn't true.
-- d (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 10, 1999.
"What the Government knows already that we don't?" EVERYTHING, if you have a hundred years or so we can scratch the surface.
-- Nikoli Krushev (email@example.com), February 10, 1999.
-- humptydumpty (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 11, 1999.
I have no doubt the spooks are at work. It's probably a high priority project (just my hunch...no facts to back it up).
Even my pitiful little site gets hit everyday by NSA and NCSC people. But that's their job. I wish I knew half of what the whole puzzle looks like from their information gathering. I think it would be interesting reading.
-- PNG (email@example.com), February 11, 1999.
If I remember right, the CIA was the first entity, or among the first, to tell its employees that Y2K means real trouble and prepare accordingly. It's probably safe to assume the CIA has a large number of computer pros on staff. I'm even more sure the NSA has lots of high tech types on board because of all the spy satellites it monitors and controls (my recollection of assigned responsibilities is only vague, sorry). In any event, between just those two agencies there are a lot of very smart people with high-tech backgrounds and I believe they've told Clinton EXACTLY what they think will happen. What you hear from agency and business heads (or their minions) is whatever spin they decided on at the last staff meeting, i.e., if the current spin isn't working, let's try another one, any suggestions to keep folks quiet? They're buying time, getting their ducks in a row. What ducks and what row is what we're trying to figure out.
What really convinces me that Clinton, et al., know what's going on is that Prime Minister Blair knows, and he and Clinton chat like washerpersons.
-- Old Git (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 11, 1999.
Right Old Git. Spin is the key word. That's all I expect to get from the gov. We discussed their spin campagn(sp?) on a thread several weeks ago, a link (I think it was from the gov.) where they talked about ad campagns to calm the public. Does anyone remember that thread? I can't remember the subject.
And this from Declan McCullah
The Senate's Secret Sessions
Clinton and republicans alike certainly know a whole lot more than they tell us. They will spin our heads as fast as they can, and we're on our own to find the real facts.
-- Chris (email@example.com), February 11, 1999.
Old Git: satellites are the responsibility of the National Reconaissance Office/Agency. And you can rest assured that the National Security Administration has the most sophisticated computers on the planet: it's been estimated they may be 50 years ahead of the private sector/ordinary military in that field. But I do agree that they are still scrambling to figure out the impact, while dispensing a lot of chaff in the propaganda press to prevent any coordinated public reaction. I'm sure they know it will be bad, but the contingency plans they are rushing to implement start with the assumption that they (Central Bank crowd) will maintain control at ANY cost. Their puppets (military/intelligence/executive) will not simply be allowed to 'call it a day and go chop wood with the home folks.' Far from it. The iron fist will put on the velvet glove and declare martial law, to maintain and coordinate the mechanisms of power they have built so carefully the last eighty-five years (Federal Reserve Act and Income Tax Act both passed in 1913). They are wolves in sheep's clothing: they will not allow the sheep pen to be destroyed, even if a lot of the sheep are dead. Nikoli's post the other day, outlining their century-long plan for domination, was right on the money (although I'd quibble about the role of Chernomyrdin). I'll give a little example of their ability to foment chaos and then step in with the 'solution.' For four years the CIA/Special Forces have been arming insurgents in Macedonia, and training the Kosovo Liberation Front. When things were in place, they allow/manufacture a few atrocities for the propaganda press to bruit about, and lo and behold we're sending American troops to Macedonia. Surprise, surprise. The same pattern is repeated over and over around the globe, and right here ate home. They can and do conduct such secret ops all the time--you'd be wise to disabuse yourself of any notion of the national security state as some bumbling fool. They advance most quickly in a situation of chaos--they might not have designed Y2K, but they are certainly planning to benefit from it.
-- Spidey (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 11, 1999.