I found this interesting article that has a quote at the end of it by Ed Yourdon:

http://www.dallasnews.com/technology-nf/techbiz404.htm

When solving the Y2K problem leads to others. Programmers are finding a host of related foul-ups-including millennium viruses - as they scramble to prepare for 2000...

-- Carol (usa-uk@email.msn.com), March 09, 1999

Answers

Carol; Good post. Ed; Good comment.

-- Watchful (seethesea@msn.com), March 09, 1999.

Two points Id like to add to this posting

First, If we have a millenium virus lurking in our computers why havent the virus scans we should all be using diligently found it, especially now that its been identified?

Secondly, Virtually every Y2k teting effort Ive ever been involved in is a full regression test, that means that ALL features of the program are tested. If a bug is encountered , testing is stopped, the problem reparied and all test cases run again. This article makes it sound like all the Y2k bugs are just noted, fixed after the test is complete and then everyone says its done. Ive never seen a compliance test plan that works that way. Am I missing something?

-- nyc (nycnyc@hotmail.com), March 09, 1999.

Oh ye of little faith!

Your making the rash and foolhardy assumption that the purpose of Y2K remediatio testing is to find bugs, fix 'em, and prevent 'em.

Shame, shame - the intent of Y2K testing is to get finished with testing as soon as possible so the "testing" can be declared complete by the government agency in charge --- so the company and Mr. K look as good as possible.

Actaully repairs and testing are irrelevent to RESULTS.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), March 09, 1999.

<>

Have the eggplants infected you too? Please lie down and take some deep breaths, it will soon pass.

-- Red Ermine (fearzone@home.com), March 10, 1999.

nyc,

Have you read how the NERC is going to test the electric industry on April 9, 1999? The document is an eye-opener. You can read it (PDF format) at this link:

ftp://www.nerc.com/pub/sys/all_updl/docs/y2k/drill-preparation- strategies.pdf

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.

nyc,

Looks like that link is dead now. But you can read about what was at the NERC link by going here...

http://www.y2knewswire.com/19990304.htm

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.

Kevin,

The link's not dead. I downloaded it in PDF format this morning. I suggest others do the same and send it to their local newspapers, or even better--the Washington Post and the Wall Street journal. Be sure to include the URL so they know it comes from an official source.

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), March 10, 1999.

If anyone does down load the file to send out would you please send it also to the Huntsville Times: joed@htimes.com or fax it to:256-532-4420. I am unable to download but I have read parts and consider it of utmost importance in this nuculear plant area. PLEASE! Maggie

-- maggie (maggiem@nehp.com), March 10, 1999.

"Actually repairs and testing are irrelevant to RESULTS." (Robert Cook)

Does this principle apply in the case of nuclear power plants...??

Not exactly a cheery idea.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), March 12, 1999.

Here's another interesting article:

"One of the most vexing problems affecting large IT systems is "malicious creativity," or pockets of code that have been written somewhat creatively by programmers. Giving someone a programming language is essentially the equivalent of handing someone a dictionary, said Philip Currier, first vice president and manager of Y2K mainframe renovation and testing for Lehman Bros., a New York securities firm. One programmer may write something simple and straightforward, while another will take a more unique approach."

http://www.techweb.com/se/directlink.cgi?CRN19990301S0099

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 12, 1999.