SONOMA Y2K'ERS, excuse the formatting on this..Scott pulls together some interesting comments, data and thoughts for this article. The areticle can be found at www.prepare4y2k.com

Interest In Y2K Falls Off Drastically

By Scott Olmsted

Flew to New Zealand last month for a vacation, and what should hit the front page of the New Zealand Herald on the day we arrived but Bug may unleash flood of sewage: "Much of the North Island, including its biggest cities, could have trouble flushing away sewage within four hours of an electricity failure caused by computer problems as the new millennium dawns."

Just can't get away from it. I predicted a year ago that this spring would see the most common cocktail party chatter become some variant of "So what are you doing to prepare for Y2K?". That was true for a short while a few months ago, but now Y2K has almost dropped off the charts--and it was a fast drop.

Interest in this site and its sister site for dehydrated food, Automated Enterprises Outfitters, fell by a factor of 3 to 4 over a period of perhaps 6 weeks. Actual food orders are down 90%. I cannot lay this to a single cause, but the combination of the phony electricity tests, Clinton's announcement that Social Security was finished (when they weren't), de Jager's pronouncement that "the back of Y2K is broken", and the ridicule, explicit and implicit, given by the media to those who have taken preparation to extremes, probably all contributed.

Also, people just get tired of a topic. Hell, I'm tired of this topic. I know there are those who are fascinated by it, but being a professional computer programmer, I see computer bugs all the time. This one (actually a design defect, I see those all the time too) just happens to be the most widespread ever. Its consequences will be the largest ever, but that doesn't make it inherently interesting.

In my opinion, it will take a large failure before 1/1/00 to rekindle interest in the general populace, and I don't that is very likely. One person with egg on his face is likely to be Jim Lord, who has given bank runs in mid-1999 a high probability. I've said before that I don't find bank runs to be at all probable, though it is not impossible. The general public does not understand banking, which means they don't worry about it, they leave that to Greenspan. No worry, no bank runs.

So now it is a waiting game. It still makes sense to prepare, though not necessarily for long infrastructure breakdowns. Personally, I think electricity, phone, or banking interruptions of more than a few days are unlikely, but of course, not impossible. My advice is to prepare for that outside chance that you might have to be completely self-sufficient for a month or two, and to be ready for nothing to happen.

I also recommend thinking about the consequences to you of a bad recession, or a depression. I believe that if there are consequences, the most serious to the average person are likely to be economic: lost jobs, lost businesses, bankruptcies, etc. My favorite financial writer, Mark Skousen, thinks that the market and the economy could take a dive later this year. Are you prepared to bail rather than watch your portfolio take a huge hit? Have you laid a foundation of 5 to 10% in gold bullion coins as insurance against disaster?

So just how likely is it that the power will go off? Dick Mills makes a good stab at a numeric estimate at Guesses, Damn Guesses, and Educated Estimates. His counclusion: "Regional or larger blackouts on 2000-01-01 are still a possibility even though the probability may be much less than 50%. Prudence dictates that we should prepare for the contingency regardless of what we believe will actually happen". It's this kind of analysis that I use to support my "doomsday unlikely" position.

Capers Jones is a software expert with important things to say about Y2K that are based on real information. Two important articles are at Q&A with Capers Jones, and THE AFTERMATH OF THE YEAR 2000 SOFTWARE PROBLEM.

Is this why Clinton is raining Tomahawks on Serbia? See Gary North's GPS System Is Not Compliant, Says Jane's:

Nearly 12,000 of the US Department of Defense's (DoD's) Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers - required for troops and weapons platforms to access the global satellite navigation network - are at high risk from the 'millennium computer bug' because they have not yet been inventoried or made compliant for the year 2000 (Y2K), according to a recent Pentagon audit. "The GPS programme office had not completed the inventory and Y2K assessment of GPS receivers procured directly by DoD organisations," said the 31 December report by the DoD Inspector General (IG).

Among the military equipment that use the uncorrected receivers to navigate with pinpoint accuracy in all weather are US Navy (USN) Tomahawk cruise missiles and P-3 Orion surveillance aircraft; US Air Force (USAF) C-17, C-130 and C-141 transport aircraft and KC-135 tanker aircraft; and hand-held units for combat troops.

Three interesting things from Gary North:

Euro Conversion Came Close to Sinking British Banking in January Free Software to Check Your PC The Jihad Story

Also from North, this:

Northwest Airlines' Experience: Cost Overruns, Huge Mess.

Then initial estimates for fixing the Y2K bug reached $25 million. "Our management was shocked," says Robert Dufek, Northwest's point man for the problem since 1991. During the last five years, that cost has roughly doubled to at least $45 million. ... But for those who pooh-pooh the Y2K scare as end-of-millennium hysteria, a needless worry, Dufek shrugs and shakes his head.

"There were just thousands and thousands of bugs that had to be weeded out," Dufek explained in his sun-filled conference room near the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport. "There is no question that every major application we have would have failed. Absolutely no question about it." . . .

Franklin Frith has a site at Y2K Is Coming. I got this press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 11, 1999

Preparing for the New Millennium Y2K, Politics and the Economy

WHO The Metro Detroit Chapter of The Joseph Project 2000 will be the proud host of two nationally-known speakers on the Y2K challenge facing the world today. David Bresnahan, Contributing Editor for WorldNetDaily.com and Franklin Frith, Y2K Consultant to Local Governments and Communities

WHAT It is possible to sort through the flood of information in the media on the Y2K problem, look at the government reports, documents and cross reference them all. Franklin Frith has been doing exactly that for 18 months. David Bresnahan will describe documents detailing the government's hidden agenda that Y2K could facilitate.

WHEN Thursday, May 27, 1999, 700 pm eastern (Adults $6, Children Free)

WHERE Northfield Hilton, 5500 Crooks Road, Troy, Michigan For directions, call the Hilton at (248)879-2100 For press interviews, call Jeff Roberts at (248)723-8714

Documented facts presented at this workshop:

1.The military is training for civil unrest in the U.S. 2.The Red Cross has purchased the largest order of MRE's in history 3.The National Guard is prepared to call up 480,000 members for Y2K 4.Department of Defense is expecting disruptions requiring military involvement 5.FEMA and the Red Cross have emergency management plans ready for Y2K 6.President Bill Clinton has purposely ordered government agencies not to tell the American people how bad the government expects things to be 7.The greatest impact will be financial devastation and depression 8.How to prepare other than buying supplies

Scott, here's a chunk of an email I just sent out to people, listing some things that have me worried.

Best, JB jbjbjb@hotmail.com

The first category consists of reputable organizations that have looked into the problem. As mentioned in a previous email, the U.S. Senate's Special Committee on Y2K, which has done extensive hearings on Y2K, published a lengthy report that raises real concerns. The report is available at the U.S. Senate's website. You need the Adobe Acrobat program to access this file. If you don't have one, you can download it for free at Acrobat Reader. Or you can read the report in standard (HTML) format at Senate Report.

Another important organization whose reports have me concerned is the General Accounting Office (GAO). The GAO is the research arm of congress and is generally held in high esteem as an impartial source of information. The GAO has done a series of detailed studies of Y2K; I believe they have done 80 studies in all. On April 14, 1999 the GAO released a report summarizing the State of U.S. governmental readiness for Y2K [unfortunately, the link does not still work]. The April 14 release date of this report is important because it means the report came after the March 31, 1999 report by the President's Council on Y2K, headed by John Koskenin, which reported that 92% of the federal government's "mission-critical" systems were now compliant. However, the GAO's report points out that this 92% figure does not include "end-to-end testing"that is, the testing of computer interfaces among agencies and between agencies and the outside world. In fact, in some cases, end-to-end testing has hardly begun.

Note that end-to-end testing has proven to be one of the more difficult, time-consuming, and problem-revealing stages of Y2K repair work. Furthermore, the GAO reported that there are many instances when even the limited definition of compliance has not actually been fulfilled. For example, the report cites specific examples where agencies self reported compliance, but upon inspection by independent analysts, the systems were found to be non-compliant. In addition, the GAO's report suggests that State governments are in very questionable condition, and indicates that many States are not even responding to attempts by the federal government to assess their status. You can skim this report in about 15 minutes. As with the senate report, you need the Acrobat Reader.

The second category that I am concerned about consists of articles, some of them technical, that are written by experts who have looked at the problem and come to conclusions that I consider at least partly worrisome. These articles lay out some of the technical and conceptual issues behind concerns about Y2K. In the area of software, see Caspers Jones' Probabilities of Year 2000 Damages (scroll down till you get to the title link). Jones is one of the world's top experts in software repair. Also see Ed Yourdon's piece. In the area of embedded systems, see Mark Frautschi's overview.

In the area of supply chains and ripple effects, the conceptual concerns are laid out in two very interesting articles: Year 2000: The domino effect and Year 2000 Network Effects. In addition, international trade dependencies, which involve everything from banking to oil, are discussed in detail in the following report of the U.S. Commerce Department: THE YEAR 2000 PROBLEM AND THE GLOBAL TRADING SYSTEM.

The third category of reports consists of military and paramilitary organizations that would be responsible for supplying relief or keeping order if Y2K went badly. These are also the organizations that would be directly involved if disruptions led to civil unrest and martial law was declared. First, see the slide show, at the U.S. Army's website on the U.S. electric power system. Note that this slide show is not simply a training show. In contrast, it presents an independent analysis of the fragility of the U.S. electric power grids, one that is more pessimistic than the much-more-widely-reported reports by NERC (North American Electric Reliability Council), the body empowered by the Department of Energy to facilitate and report on the electric industry's progress. A related source is the National Guard's statement on Y2K. (The National Guard's statement, however, is not, to my knowledge, based on a detailed independent assessment.) As an aside, I've read an anonymous and unconfirmed report on the internet about an 18-wheel truck that was stopped by a state trooper near Huston, Texas, for a traffic violation. This unconfirmed report states that the trooper, upon inspecting the truck's cargo container, was shocked to find that it was entirely filled with signs saying "This City Is Under Martial Law." This report may or may not be accurate, but based on the material presented at the Army's and National Guard's websites, and in other government documents, I would not be surprised if it were true. In a crisis, a period of martial law could play a vital role in keeping order and distributing essential suppliesso in and of itself this report does not in the least disturb mebut I think it is important to consider the possibility that active military and paramilitary contingency planning is now underway.

From Windows Magazine OnLine, April 1, 1999:

Real-World Y2K Woes

Speculation about how Y2K glitches will affect computing runs rampant these days, but a recent survey by the Information Technology Association of America in Arlington, Va., paints a realistic picture of the problems you can expect the Y2K bug to cause. More than one-third of the survey's 400 respondents reported problems ranging from computer crashes to chip failures. Data-exchange errors affected 34% of the respondents. The other most common problems were accounting errors (27%), corrupted database files (21%) and computer crashes (18%). Not even Y2K-ready commercial software packages are bug-free: 28% of the respondents reported errors with such programs.

Scott,

Interesting bit of news. Though Wisconsin's power company (Wisconsin Electric Power Company - WEPCO) claims to be on track with y2k solutions, Milwaukee city government is investing in several million dollars of generators. Up to now, Milwaukee officials have kept silent on the problem...

Donald P Drews Milwaukee, WI

From Roleigh Martin's listserv April 5:

Roleigh,

This is a true "story" , albeit from a friend of a friend of mine. I have withheld the names, but could supply them with their permission. Just thought you might like to hear of one of the bugs in Minnesota.

Brenda Wieland Callaway, MN (Becker Co)

Y2K seems to be "biting" the Ottertail County Treasurer's office. I was in there today to pay my real estate tax, but when the person helping me typed in the year 2000, his computer rolled back to 1900 and told him he owed me $105,000,000. in change! I said I would gladly accept his "gift", but I just needed a few minutes to go home and get a bigger purse. )

Scott,

I think that there are students who are not living with, or getting financial support from their parents who are going to school and working who could benefit from this. Could you pass it along? It is mainly targeted at how married students can prepare.

Much has been said about students not having the resources to get food storage. It is a daunting thought to think of getting food storage when you think of others in a more prosperous position who have a seemingly endless supply of money with which to get their storage. As a student, I can understand this position. Not only am I a student, but I am married, and my wife and I have a daughter, and a son on the way. I also have to work 30-40 hours a week in addition to school to support my young family.

Often for those of us who are students or newly married (or both, for that matter), it is fairly unreasonable to get a one year supply of food, or move to a rural area. However, it is possible to get the basics. My wife and I have figured that if we set aside ten dollars a week, we can buy at least one case of food, water, or other supplies every one to three weeks. A conservative estimate of how much food we can have stored would be ten cases of food, and water and other non-food items in addition to this. If one were a single student, five dollars a week could get some basic emergency supplies, and an extra two weeks to a month's supply of food.

This is how I think the majority of those preparing will need to prepare. I think that this is the type of plan that is the most feasable for most people, not just students and young marrieds. If more of us can just focus on getting what we can, shopping the sales, and preparing bit-by-bit, then more of us will be prepared and fewer of us will have a tendency to panic.

May you find that extra little cash, store that extra can, and may we as millions of prepared people everywhere see the new millenium as a brighter dawn, and not a dark day. Best wishes,

Mike Ballard mdb84@email.byu.edu

From The Y2K Weatherman:

Ed Harvey (AMSUS) reported that most of the pharmaceutical industry has already completed or scheduled production for the remainder of 1999, and some are already scheduling well into 2000. A large number of manufacturers have already increased stock (some up to 20%) to prevent Y2K-related shortages. The main issue is to reassure the public that there is no need to hoard. The most common concern is with overseas Y2K problems, since 90% of the active drug substances used to manufacture prescription generic pharmaceuticals originate overseas. Transportation is also a concern with international trade partners, especially in China and Eastern Europe.

Full minutes.

I have harped again and againg on the testing question: if it ain't tested, it ain't fixed. A huge portion of the "fixed" software being put into use will fail sometime in 2000 because it hasn't been properly tested, a difficult, expensive, and time-consuming effort. Here is more from Gary North on this:

A Miracle in Washington: 92% Compliance, Yet Under 50% Spent by 12/31/98:.

This letter to House Majority Leader Dick Armey from the General Accounting Office reports that less thasn 50% of the $7.5 billion budget for y2k repairs had been spent by December 31, 1998.

By March 31, 1999, 24 U.S. government agencies were 92% compliant, according to unverified reports by the agencies.

Think of this: government projects coming in under budget, and 92% on time (if we, along with the media, forget about the September 30, 1998 original deadline).

Pareto Strikes Again: 80% Completion Means the Hard Part Lies Ahead:

The fact that a project can be 92% complete and only 50% spent is not at all unusual. It falls right along with Pareto's law: If the easiest 80% of the goals take 20% of the work, guess which goals are going to be reached first? Assuming a linear distribution in the 80/20 law, getting 92% of the work done should take about 68% of the effort. But the distribution is *not* really linear: those last few little, final, crucial, and virtually impossible goals take a hugely disproportionate amount of work, even among the 20% of the 'difficult' goals.

Really, what this means is that if it's taken a certain amount of time to get X% compliant (where X is some large, reassuring number less than 100%), that's not something reassuring--it's an indicator that the thorniest, most difficult problems are yet to be solved.

Jonathan Clemens

Hey Scott

I went to a y2k Expo last weekend And I have never seen so many RIP-OFFS.. One guy had a 45 watt solar panel with 2 12 volt batteries and a 250 watt inverter in a plywood box. He was telling the people it would power most of thier house for only 2995.00. That was the biggest ripoff but there were plenty of others.

Steve in Smyrna, Tn.

And if you don't believe anything until the New York Times tells you, here it is (May 6, 1999):

Studies Cite Lag in Year 2000 Projects

The prevailing optimism that year 2000 computer problems will not seriously affect American business is premature, according to two new studies of Government filings by the nation's largest companies.

The studies focused on quarterly financial reports in which companies disclose to the Securities and Exchange Commission how much they had spent through the end of last year to deal with year 2000 computer malfunctions. The authors of both studies concluded that although the written descriptions of the corporate year 2000 projects are uniformly rosy, the actual spending figures suggest that many large companies had left themselves just one year to complete over half their work.

The filings also showed that estimates of the total cost of dealing with the year 2000 problem continued to rise in the last three months of last year, albeit at a slower pace.

"A significant number of companies in every industry sector started late and too much work remains for them to finish in 1999," said Steven Hock, president of Triaxsys Research, summarizing the findings of a report to be issued today on S.E.C. disclosure statements. The statements were filed from January through March by 647 of the 1,000 largest companies as listed by Fortune magazine.

"Some are just not going to make it in time and will be forced to rely heavily on contingency plans and crisis management to avoid serious business disruptions," Hock said. ... "A significant number of companies in every industry sector started late and too much work remains for them to finish in 1999," said Steven Hock, president of Triaxsys Research, summarizing the findings of a report to be issued today on S.E.C. disclosure statements. The statements were filed from January through March by 647 of the 1,000 largest companies as listed by Fortune magazine. . . .

Scott's Previous Thoughts

-- Jean Wasp (jean@sonic.net), May 17, 1999