cl...case in point!

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Electric Utilities and Y2K : One Thread

cl,

dick mills new article addresses the issue nicely. the point is that even when you think you are compliant...you aren't. http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/PP/RC/dm9919.htm

Despite being deemed ready for online use, the new software has lots of problems. My position on this has been that when things are declared 100% ready and 100% tested, they have found about 85% of the bugs. In the coming months, you're going to hear hundreds of declarations that "We are totally confident that we are 100% ready."

"Keep this in mind. the disruptions were widespread and no doubt very annoying to many people, but it took 3 months before the story got big enough to report in the newspaper.

my position is the same. anyone that has spent time working in the computer industry knows that just when you think that everything is a go...it is usually when everything comes to a screeching halt.

-- Anonymous, May 13, 1999

Answers

Which billing system failure was responsible for TMI?

-- Anonymous, May 13, 1999

address the issue in this post.

i was refering to my 'other' comment.

'other' comment see below

this problem is not as simple as you tend to make it appear.

-- Anonymous, May 13, 1999


"There are mission critical non-safety-related functions such as digital feedwater controls, moisture separator reheater controls, reactor recirculating coolant controls, and motor generator set controls that are affected by the Y2K concern and have required remediation. These balance-of-plant functions are critical for power generation."

NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 99-12: YEAR 2000 COMPUTER SYSTEMS READINESS AUDITS

It seems to me that this portion of the IN defines the proper context for any straightforward reply to marianne's post. Or am I somehow mistaken?

-- Anonymous, May 19, 1999


Moderation questions? read the FAQ