Programmer Lane Core has posted another hard hitting look at current remediation progress. This is on the Westergaard site today.

www.y2ktimebomb.com/Media/lcore9922.htm

I only wish some of our Polly posters could understand this data.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), June 02, 1999

Answers

I just wish they could dress themselves each morning. Thanks Gordon...good info!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 02, 1999.

Very entertaining read. Reminds me that I'm either (a) not nuts, or (b) not the only one who's nuts.

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), June 02, 1999.

An excellent article. Here's the hotlink to make it easy:

www.y2ktimebomb.com/Med ia/lcore9922.htm

-- Arnie Rimmer (Arnie_Rimmer@usa.net), June 02, 1999.

OOOPS. Mea Culpa. I forget the all-important 'http://' Let's try that again:

http://www.y2kti mebomb.com/Media/lcore9922.htm

-- Arnie Rimmer (Arnie_Rimmer@usa.net), June 02, 1999.

hardcore

-- humpty (no.6@thevillage.com), June 02, 1999.

what he said.

-- humpty (no.6@thevillage.com), June 02, 1999.

Lane, this is a great article! (Thanks for the link.)

No way Poole or any of the other Der Boonkers will respond to this latest by Lane. It's gotten to the point where their only response is to taunt, "But you still have to say 'if'. Ha ha, you don't know what's going to happen either!"

I'm reminded of that creature in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the Ravenous Bugbladder Beast (if my memory serves), which was so stupid that if threatened by one you need only cover your head with a towel; the creature would assume that because you could not see it, it could not see you and would go away.

Got towels?

-- David Palm (djpalm64@yahoo.com), June 02, 1999.

Superb! Thank you Lane. This piece should be required reading.

IEA's Assessment of Y2K and Oil Refineries didn't receive much play here. Or did I miss the thread? Quite likely the latter.

Best Wishes,

-- Bingo1 (howe9@pop.shentel.net), June 02, 1999.

The Y2K trajectory proceeds, in its broad outlines (remediation and testing worldwide) exactly along the path forecast three years ago, two years ago and last year by many of us, Lane included. Sadly.

What we underestimated was the tremendous success of the PR campaign. Stunning.

We mustn't let it affect our own preps. Wouldn't surprise me at all if 50% of Y2K remediation projects come in late ... and that's just the "mission-critical stuff."

Anyone who thinks we're getting out of this without an economic and social earthquake is kidding themselves.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), June 02, 1999.

Thank you to Lane for talking straight!

"Our genius computer scientists and visionary corporate tycoons and governmental bureaucratic hot-shots let the Y2K situation develop as they have: by neglect, by incompetence, by ineptitude, by procrastination, by myopic tunnel-vision -- our experts and leaders, as a group, have let the Y2K situation develop as they have. That indisputable fact itself is sufficient proof that it would be difficult to find a question too stupid to ask about the conduct of Y2K projects."

Exactly.

Now, what kind of broad moment of clarity or spiritual awakening has occurred within corporations or government entities or small businesses within the last year or two or three that would cause a shift away from the behavior of the past? Did a memo go out and I missed it? When exactly did this "great shift" in the business practices of the past occur?

Y2k doesn't happen in a vacuum and many of the people responsible for the decisions today were the same people involved in creating the problem yesterday. Budget shortfalls, missed deadlines, outside influence and interference are all just as likely today as they were yesterday. And failure is not only a necessity it is a given.

So, the only question left is just what will fail and how big will it be? And the only option left to a prudent person is to prepare as best as one can for what might occur and keep hope alive.

Thanks Gordon for the heads up.

Mike ===================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mt4design@aol.com), June 02, 1999.

Same ol' same ol'

The doomer argument hasn't changed since last year. And you call this data analysis?

-- rotten core (rofl@same.arguments), June 02, 1999.

rotten core,

ROTFLMAO! That's it? That's the "rebuttal" to Core's piece? I paraphrase:

"That's the problem with you doomers. All you ever do is cite hard evidence of companies falling behind, utilities encountering troubles, international lagging, reports of lying about progress. Ya call that a case????"

Well yeah, mr. rotten, that's exactly what I call a case. Do you have one?

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!

-- David Palm (djpalm64@yahoo.com), June 02, 1999.

Thanks, Lane. One of many well-researched, thoughtful articles you've written. I'm sending its links all over.

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), June 02, 1999.

C'mon optimists...don't let this thread go away without posting your best arguments against Mr. Core. C'mon...it's right here, the perfect opportunity to show you can dispute facts and not just bicker over speculation and prediction regarding the unknown future.

Don't let this thread go away. C'mon...give it your best shot. What are the facts you can offer that show the other side of remediation progress?

Bump this thread up again, please.

Mike ==============================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mt4design@aol.com), June 03, 1999.

Micheal - they can't argue from facts, only from "emotions" - "We must prevent panic." "We must keep their money in the banks...."

Now that they have prevented panic, what are they going to do when there are problems?

And they don't have an answer to that one either.....

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 03, 1999.