Gosh, can you believe what Milne said this week? OUTRAGEOUS!

Y2K is a "worldwide crisis" and "one of the most serious and potentially devastating events this nation has ever encountered."

Sheesh. What a moron. Comparing the possible effects of Y2K to, what? WWII? The Great Depression? Oh, sorry. That wasn't Milne? That was a couple of Senators?

Well, here is a reckless statement from Ed Your-done-for about California's Y2K progress. Do you believe that a so-called expert (hey, Ed has been wrong about EVERYTHING for the past 30 years) could be so irresponsible?

"It's very difficult for us, when we have a thorough report from a fine state auditor that's in direct opposition to the Department of Information Technology. What is DOIT going to do in the next 310 days? Or even the next 15 days? We have 17 programs in 14 departments that are not ready to go. The ramifications of this are horrendous, and we need assurances this is going to be dealt with."

Typical. There goes Ed trying to sell us more videos. What? What's that you say? That wasn't Yourdon? That was a California assemblywoman challenging the director of the Department of Technology last week? And he didn't quarrel with her assessment? And this was after the state had publicly proclaimed that most departments were near completion?

Well, hey, HERE'S a great one. Let's see, this is from PNG on this very NG. Boy, is this lame or what:

"... the bug will breed instability abroad; terrorists may try to take advantage of it; U.S. soldiers who respond might lack basic electricity, phones, transportation and water; and U.S. defense computers are at high risk of infection by viruses possibly placed by myriad Y2K contractors now working on them.

If that's not enough, the CIA also reported that Russia's early warning system has Y2K problems that may make it incorrectly conclude it is under attack. Also, key power, oil and banking systems abroad could easily fail."

Yeah, PNG, like you know anything, holed up there with the Japs. Love it or leave it, PNG. Yo? You're kidding. That wasn't PNG? That was from an in-depth article reporting last week's Senate findings?

All right then, well how about this typically insane rant by Nikoli, you know, one of those "crazy Russian" posts of his:

"We think the Russians may have some Y2K problems in the early warning systems that they use to monitor foreign missile launches. These could lead to incorrect information being provided by such systems, or system outages."

Get a life, Nikoli, duh. Who? Get a life, John Gordon? Who's that? The deputy CIA director? And he said what else? "some older Soviet nuclear reactors are vulnerable to Y2K and could crash vast power networks. And he said oil and gas pipelines in many countries  which export to the United States  might be shut down by Y2K problems."

You're sure that wasn't Nikoli?

OK, OK, OK. Now, look, this last one is the best of all, a real Cory Hamasaki special. Typical of mainframe guys who don't even know mainframes (didn't he say he mostly programs on PCs these days). What a putz. Let's see, what did he say?

"U.S. industries such as health care, oil, education, farming, food processing and construction are seriously lagging on computer repairs. International ports and airports are far behind in Y2K efforts. And many Asian and Latin American countries hit hard with recent economic problems have not had the money needed to fix Y2K problems."

Sure, sure, Cory. Like those industries use big iron or something. Come on, grow up. What that? What? That was from the Bennett report also.

Hmmmmm .....

Oh, I know. Hey, at least I know who said this!

"It's just like you doomers to grab onto anything that supports your position while you ignore all the good news that is out there."

Who said that? Just wait, they'll show up on this very thread ....

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 26, 1999

Answers

Thanks BD. I needed that.

-- a (a@a.a), February 26, 1999.

BigDog,

ROFL! Your post actually cheered me up!

-- Elbow Grease (Elbow_Grease@AutoShop.com), February 26, 1999.

Give em hell Bigdog. Your bite is worse than your bark!

-- Rob Michaels (sonofdust@net.com), February 26, 1999.

SSSSICK 'UM BOY!

-- Lon Frank (postit@here.com), February 26, 1999.

Hence the many front page newspaper stories this week. Once again, it's easy for the media to ignore wackos like us Yourdonites and Gary North. Not so easy though when the Senate starts to sound like us. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 26, 1999.

A couple of Senators: "potentially devastating"

A California politician: "we need assurances"

The Senate: "may try to take advantage", "might lack", "at high risk"

The CIA: "may make it incorrectly conclude", "could fail", "may have some Y2K problems in the early warning systems" , "could lead to incorrect information", "could crash vast power networks", "might be shut down"

I don't understand why politicians and political organizations become reliable sources of information when they start worrying. Have *their* sources changed? The CIA is paid to worry, but their track record lately stinks. And I love the California Congresswoman who wants reassurances. You want 'em, you got 'em. Reassurances are free.

Milne has used Koskinen as documentation when he expresses concerns, and rejected him as an idiot when he doesn't *in the same speech!* Big Dog isn't quite so blatant, but still accepts politicians' concerns as real support for his position, and rejects their reassurances as hype and spin because they're politicians! Hell, I can prove *anything* if I'm allowed to accept only what agrees with me and reject the rest. Any trial lawyer can tell you that for $500 a day, you can find a *qualified* expert to testify to *anything*.

As I'm sure everyone here knows, I could fill a huge posting with positive y2k news, and wouldn't even need to stoop to quoting politicians to do it -- I could limit it to those actually involved in the projects. And have it all rejected as self-reporting and therefore unreliable.

And Big Dog gets three cheers for quoting politicians? C'mon people, lets make at least a pretense at consistency.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), February 26, 1999.

JACkASS IDiOT DgI'S WIll TReMBLe AND QUaKE WHeN SEnATE REpoRTS BEgIN TO LOok LiKE DIeTER RAnTInGS???????

wHEN EO's arE SIGnED- bY ORdER OF mE, BiLL clInTON, JACkAL INfIdeL

YikES????

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), February 26, 1999.

Flint, from the tone of your posts tonight either you had a really bad day or someone appointed you God. Since I doubt the latter, I hope you have a better day tomorrow.

-- De (dealton@concentric.net), February 26, 1999.

.... sigh. When you place Dieter next to Flint and Dieter makes tons more sense, you know Y2K is going to be > 8.

Besides Flint, you're just plain wrong. I have stated publicly on this NG that I take SSA as "compliant" and that, in general, I'm willing to concede that most of those on this NG who claim personal knowledge of compliance are honest AND that the world will reach the compliance levels predicted.

The problem is, Flint, that won't be enough. The compliance predictions stink, Flint, taken on balance. You set up the strawman of all-or-nothing and try to paint that onto most of us, but the GIs on this NG don't handle it that way.

Your problem is, YOU can't analyze the entire picture, which is why you waffle like Slick himself on a nearly day-to-day basis. Now you're in your "up" phase (I know, I know, you're just an objective fellow who has noticed that the "facts" have changed, while the rest of us psychotics are apparently wishing for the downfall of Western civilization). Give it a rest, will you? You really are unable to think in a systemic fashion.

"Just wait, they'll show up on this very thread."

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 26, 1999.

Big Dog:

You're right. I can't think on the systemic scale required. In this respect, though, I'm an agnostic. I know I can't do it, and I don't believe you can either.

I simply don't know how bad it will be. There are too many details, too many interdependencies, too many unknowns and imponderables. I waffle because I can't see the future. Those who claim they can don't waffle, but have a bad track record.

I still don't think selective quoting of politicians accomplishes much.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), February 26, 1999.

Big Dog. Maybe us bow-wows should start running in packs. We could always cut one or two from the herd if we work together.

Flint. You're wrong. Quoting politicians does have one purpose. It can make therest of us laugh instead of cry. Loosen up.

Lobo

-- Lobo (hiding@woods.com), February 26, 1999.

Lobo --- Yes, EXACTLY. Of course this thread is ludicrous at heart, just as is Y2K itself.

You see, is Milne more credible than Bennett or Bennett more credible than Milne? Is PNG more credible than the Deputy Director of the CIA or vice versa?

It's ironic that Flint has less of a sense of humor even than his arch-nemesis Milne (I'm serious there). He doesn't realize that it is one of the factors that hampers him from grasping its likely consequences.

Arf-arf, my dear Lobo.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 26, 1999.

BD,

LOL! Great post! it has indeed been a bad week for the pollyannas!

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), February 27, 1999.

You're a riot, BigDog.

But just one question...Why does the CIA, NSA, NCSC visit my site and I never visit theirs?

-- PNG (png@gol.com), February 27, 1999.

That should be WOOF!! WOOF!! You're a big dog now, remember?

Lobo

-- Lobo (hiding@woods.com), February 27, 1999.

-Got TVP?

-- Critt Jarvis (critt@critt.com), February 27, 1999.

Well, we have to believe you now, Big Dog ! You said Flint would show up and he did! ROFLMAO.

-- Sue (deco100@aol.com), February 27, 1999.

I don't know,

I think Flint's right. I mean if business folks like me say there's gonna be a problem, well, we're just ignorant of the computer industry. And if the programers say we're in troubele, well, they're just trying to make a quick buck. And if the Senate special committee finds a real problem, well, we all know shat a bunck of lying, conspiritoriual nincompoops they are! And if,...

Oh, wait a munite. I think I see my cuz, Ole' Mose Babineaux, commin' down the bayou in his pereaux. He's got a stone tablet with him. I can't quite make it out, but The first part says,.. "Written in stone by the finger of GOD",...and, uh, .." Thou shalt kiss thine silly butts goodbye". Well, I guess The Big Guy is gettin in on the act, too,.... probably just gonna raise our tithes again.

(Man, I hope we don't have to throw a virgin inta' the bayou. Them's scarcer than alligator wings around here.)

-- Lon Frank (postit@here.com), February 27, 1999.

"shat a bunck"??? try "what a bunch" (I definately have a *keyboard* problem, anyway!

-- Lon Frank (postit@here.com), February 27, 1999.

PNG - 'cause they're interested in your opinion, and you're not interested in theirs...cheez I thought that was obvious!

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), February 27, 1999.

I agree there may be some problems.But banks have been slicing and dicing,repackaging and dumping 30 year mortgages since 1971,and Y2K has already been a variable,obviously. Also Social Security has been shelling out bread for people born in 1899...well into the 20th century. Also,programs internally generated should be able to tell 1900 from 2000 because the structure is different with respect to how the month is constructed. I believe in preparedness..always.I just wanted to share these observations.

-- ed (onezero@csrlink.net), February 27, 1999.

ed,

The problem is that those bank and SSA programs are applications programs. If the operating systems within the computers is Y2K faulty, then the best applications software on the planet is useless. If they have power.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), February 27, 1999.

PNG - mis-quoting Sir Arlin from above:

PNG - 'cause they're interested in your opinion, and you're not interested in theirs...cheez I thought that was obvious!

Also - 'cuase you've been right more often than they have been.

(Besides, they can copy and paste your comments directly into their reports, and my typing is so bad, they have to interpret my opinions back from the original Sankrit hieroglypfics.)

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.R@csaatl.com), February 28, 1999.