WHAT I KNOW.....a concise statement explaining the doombrood`s reasoning about y2k....with a list of the top 40 crucial facts about y2k....DOSEN`T EXIST!....Should it exist?...Could it have any impact?....Comments Please....I heard a newscaster suggest "...prepare like a snowstrom"....2 and 3/4 inches by the tone and manner....Here let me amend this, what i meant was BRILLANT COMMENTS PLEASE!

-- bud (ex-lurker@computer`s edge.com), February 12, 1999

Answers

WHAT I KNOW

What I know is that Bud Doesn't seem to be able to communicate in the english language. Whats his question ?

Now .. wasn't that BRILLIANT? :o)

-- Mike (mickle2@aol.com), February 12, 1999.

Bud,

Here are two links to a speech by Senator Bob Bennett of Utah on Y2K that covers many of the issues involved...

Transcript:

http://home.swbell.net/adheath/bennett.htm

Video:

http://www.bog.frb.fed.us/y2k/CSPAN/19980715/Complete.ram

Senator Bennett is chairman of the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000.

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), February 12, 1999.

What I know is y2k will be more than a freaking snowstorm. Look over the past 1000's of posts here. You better start preping now, the price of poker is going up fast.

-- Bill (y2khippo@yahoo.com), February 12, 1999.

"Anyone living within 5 miles of a Burger King, will be hamburger." Bardou

"Paul Milne is the voice of reason." Bardou

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

Can this forum stop preaching to the choir long enough to impact public perception of y2k? If so, how?

-- bud (ex-lurker@comrters edge.com), February 12, 1999.

We'll aren't we part of the public and aren't we expressing our opinions and perceptions here? This isn't a private BB. There's some who post on here their positive perception of Y2K, and we automatically call them either a troll, a pollyanna, DGI, etc. I would imagine if someone posted here with logical reasoning on why Y2K will not be a serious threat there's enough sensible people here that would listen to reason and documentation that cannot be refuted. So far, I haven't seen that happen. So as long as we keep reading posts that give valuable information or insight, the choir will keep singing. This may not be a "BRILLLANT COMMENT," but it sounds good to me. Tra la la la la laaaaaa!

-- Tralalalalaaaaaaa (Tralalalala@choir.com), February 12, 1999.

One more try from a very GI. Does anybody have any good ideas on how we can change the `spin` in the media on y2k? and you`re right the intial post was unclear.

-- bud (bud@computers edge.com), February 12, 1999.

Check out the thread

For those of you reeling from the strange state we find ourselves in.....

for at least a partial reason why giving "proofs" is almost impossible.

The two unverses (GI and DGI are so far apart that if one is firmly entrenched in either it is hard to see the other.

-- Greybear

- Got reasons?

-- Greybear (greybear@home.com), February 12, 1999.

Also

Bud, I am opposed to and will not knowingly participate in overt "spinning". Defined for these purposes as taking something and apply ing an oposite rotational force to it to make it more palatable to someone else.

The spin guys are one of the things that have gotten us in the mess we are in.

-- Greybear (greybear@home.com), February 13, 1999.

Tralalala, that WAS brilliant! In its simplicity :-)

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

Bud,

You can find introductory Y2K news articles and items at this link...

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000UdL

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), February 13, 1999.

It is in the nature of the y2k problem that it is very difficult to pin down exactly which 40 issues will prove to be the most important ones. If you asked ten of the 8+ people on this bb to list their top 4 crucial y2k facts you would probably get a list of 25 or so crucial facts, plus doubles. For me the most crucial FACT that I can definitely take to the bank and which definately has crucial consequences is that Sooo many(i.e. millions, including biggies,)companies and countries have started too late to fix their systems, therefore will have difficulties (at least) with their business which will cause markets to plummet..so get out of the market. This is what I tell anyone and everyone, and I have total "faith" in all premises of this argument. Now there will be heaps of other effects, probably quite a few more important ones, but I'm not goin' on about them here. (another crucial fact would be the considerable probability of teotwawki, but i could go on and on. we all could..)

Anyhow, what I want to get around to saying in this post is that the pro-Teotwawki argument is quite strong precisely because of the multiple weakness points which y2k attacks, each of which are sufficient to bring the whole shebang down. There's at least 10 or twelve industries that are crucial to our modern-urban survival, and each of these are dependent on each other to varying degrees. And they're all threatened seriously at the same time, due to their common dependency on computers...You might have proof that, say, 9 of these will be mostly ok, - we'd still be stuffed.

I'm tired and so not finking that goodly, but what I'm tryin to say is the reason why we'd have trouble settling on an agreed list of the 40 most crucial y2k facts is the same reason why y2k problem is guaranteed to a least be pretty bad -----Systematicalousness. It's attacking from a hundred directions at once and it's difficult to see where our crucial exposures are.....but it's easy tooo...fractional reserves, J.I.T., juice, telco, poisonfire, humans.

-- humptydumpty (no.6@thevillage.com), February 14, 1999.