If I'm so unimportant that CPR (Charles Reuben) won't waste his time "debating" me, why does he or one of his stooges post something on the "Bonkers Board" every time my name comes up here (or apparently anywhere else)?

Examples include:
The Geoffrey James article
Dr. Dobbs review of Time Bomb 2000
More (or less) about the Geoffrey James article
Something or other about Ed Yourdon's sources
My article in Cory Hamasaki's Weather report

I would really like to know the answer to this. If anyone here can figure it out, please post it.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999

Answers

LOL

Sorry Mr. Heller...But I could not help myself. The explanation is fairly easy to understand, if you will step back a little ways and look at your situation. Keeping in mind at the same time...That down here in Texas we unfortunately have a few people whose family tree has may be two or three branches on it. Now pondered this...He might have been married three times and still have the same set of inlaws. Or in other words he very likely went to family reunons to find a date...

After a few generations; having passed using this practice. Youfin that the individual is an athority on more subjects, than they have I.Q. points. But they do fixate on some one or something fairly easy.

It is fairly obivious that more than a little envy is involved...But I find it of more concern that the fellow (who is such an athority) is not out there in the real world going like there was no tomorrow trying to repair the code. Instead of making a pest of himself.

You will not disuade him though; his tactics have become pure pleasure to him. And with his red necked good old boy heritage, he is easily entertained. I would almost believe that he is a Texas Aggie..Chuckle!!! But even they have some standards. One of them being that their students know cow flop on sight when they see it. And this fellow seems to enjoy stepping in it LOL

Texas Red

-- Texas Red (Texan@lone.star), August 04, 1999.

Yeah,Texas,

Strange that someone who considers it only a BITR has the time to spend doing all those postings.

Steve,

Well, he couldn't follow you to Cory's newsletter. Very good article.

-- sue (deco100@aol.com), August 04, 1999.

If he starts writing poems and songs to you, thaaaat's when you have cause to worry.

If he stops following up your posts, will you step onto your balcony, " ...what light through yonder window breaks? Is it CPR...."

Face it Steve, you're a credible realist. You have a strong technical background, specific expertise, and even though I haven't seen you detailed it, obviously considerable experience in programming in a wide range of situations.

The fact that you can draw upon these strengths and then say, "Houston, we may have a problem." is disturbing to them.

The pollies, CPR and the two or three aggressive stingers, are terrified. If they are wrong, they are horribly wrong.

If you are wrong, you have a nice rural house, some neat hobbies, and still have a good life.

Cognitive Dissonance triggers their morbid preoccupation and anger.

I've pointed out that local officials, Ko-skin-em, the DeeCee government, the local hospitals, etc. are making preparations that far, far exceed mine. They say, "calm down, 3 days, it'll be like a snowstorm." But they're dragging in "Locomotive Sized Generators" (according to the Washington Post) and have a schedule for pairs of armed guards at the 7-11's and other key spots, feeding and "Warming Centers". Kosky just announced his survivalist bunker, excuse me, command center.

By moving to Texas, like Ed Yourdon you're one small notch more doomer than the official government action. For some reason, that makes you a target.

I wonder why they're not fixated on Kosky's bunker, excuse me, command center, the "Locomotive Sized Generators", the "up to 90 days of water" that the DC hospitals are stockpiling, the armed guards at the 7-11's?

As a moderate, I think a "Van-sized generator", up to 45 days of water, etc. may be sufficient.

But who can understand the mind of the polly? It may all be driven by pheromones and other chemical signals.

-- cory (kiyoinc@ibm.XOUT.net), August 04, 1999.

Perhaps he read your resume and is waiting for the next chapter.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), August 04, 1999.

CPR=MEMES=BULLSH*T. Keep up the good work Steve and don't sweat the small stuff. And believe me cpr is small stuff.

-- y2k dave (xsdaa111@hotmail.com), August 04, 1999.

Mr. Heller:

Surely you didn't ask this question in seriousness. Was it not you that began a thread entitled "CPR exposes himself"...or something of that nature? Was it not you that brought CPR's credibility to TB2000 both in the thread in which you presented your resume and the thread regarding the "Expert's Opinions"? Wasn't there something else said about "I hope he's reading this or that someone will take it back to him?"

I remember first learning about Debunkers when someone here asked me why someone responded to me at Debunkers. I had no clue the board even existed. I post there now perhaps as regularly as I post to any other Y2k fora. I'm the one who originally posted Geoffrey James' August 2 article at Debunkers. Y2kdave had posted it at TB2000 first, but I thought the article a good one. I was unaware at the time of your previous confrontation with Mr. James.

Personally, I'd like to see more non-heated discussions regarding the unfolding of Y2k, both on TB2000 AND on Debunkers. Many of us have both spent years remediating systems and several years researching the impact, and drawn different conclusions. These conclusions seem to result in folks being lumped into at least two "camps." The most notable are the optimists and pessimists, although lesser "camps" exist on both sides of this extreme as well as inbetween. I don't think anyone benefits from the "pissing contests" that have resulted....the "I have better qualifications than you.", the "My example trumps your example." Those that choose to engage in these contests can expect to receive in kind that of which they dish out.

I don't know to whom you refer when you use the term "stooges." Since I post on occasion to Debunkers, am I included as a CPR stooge? Since I post on occasion to TB2000, does that make me a Yourdonite? I think not, but I can't speak for you.

Tex: It's my understanding that Charles is a New York transplant to Texas, so the family tree jokes simply don't apply. Actually, I've lived in Texas myself for 5 years now (a Chicago transplant), but I've not seen the born in Texas folks fitting this bill either.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), August 04, 1999.

Steve, all anyone has to do is go to the Debunking Y2K page and scroll down and read the titles of all the posts. It's like Psychology 101! Nobody who reads those titles can take those people seriously. And cpr posts 95 percent of the stuff, most of it conversations with himself!!! The website owner, Doc Paulie, chose fannybubbles for his e-mail name, yet his fake e-mail name is I Hate Clowns. Go figure.

People who want to investigate Y2K will read that stuff and then go to the material being trashed: i.e., if these idiots say it's crazy, then it MUST be sane!!!

-- Troll (watching@the.bridge), August 04, 1999.

Now, there's a gal with no sense of humor! Don't ask her to mud, KOS!

-- y2klady (y2klady2@y2klady.com), August 04, 1999.

Hey,Troll,

I went over there and it's weird! Everything you said is right. It's like a whole board for CPR rants, which are really hard to read (well, understand anyway) and then Doc or Paul throw something in every once in a while, I guess to bolster him up.

-- sue (deco100@aol.com), August 04, 1999.

Texas Red:

It is fairly obivious that more than a little envy is involved...But I find it of more concern that the fellow (who is such an athority) is not out there in the real world going like there was no tomorrow trying to repair the code. Instead of making a pest of himself.

Why should he do that? After all, everything is taking care of already. In his fevered imagination, anyway.

You will not disuade him though; his tactics have become pure pleasure to him.

I don't believe I will be able to dissuade him, but that's really not necessary. As long as I can expose him for the fraud and lunatic that he really is, that'll be good enough for me.

Sue:

Well, he couldn't follow you to Cory's newsletter. Very good article.

Thank you. Actually, if he had anything to say that made sense, I imagine that Cory would be happy to have him write an article for his newsletter. Unfortunately, I don't think that's very likely.

Cory:

If he starts writing poems and songs to you, thaaaat's when you have cause to worry.

Let's hope it never gets to that point.

If he stops following up your posts, will you step onto your balcony, " ...what light through yonder window breaks? Is it CPR...."

No, I'll breathe a sigh of relief.

Face it Steve, you're a credible realist. You have a strong technical background, specific expertise, and even though I haven't seen you detailed it, obviously considerable experience in programming in a wide range of situations.
The fact that you can draw upon these strengths and then say, "Houston, we may have a problem." is disturbing to them.

Yes, that is the explanation that seems most likely. In addition, they have no way to disqualify me on the basis that "I'm only in it for the money" or on the basis that "I don't know anything about programming".

The pollies, CPR and the two or three aggressive stingers, are terrified. If they are wrong, they are horribly wrong.
If you are wrong, you have a nice rural house, some neat hobbies, and still have a good life.
Cognitive Dissonance triggers their morbid preoccupation and anger.

Yes, I believe that is true also. They cannot accept the possibility that they are wrong, because the consequences of that would be too terrible. Therefore, they must attack anyone who points out weaknesses in their argument.

I've pointed out that local officials, Ko-skin-em, the DeeCee government, the local hospitals, etc. are making preparations that far, far exceed mine. They say, "calm down, 3 days, it'll be like a snowstorm." But they're dragging in "Locomotive Sized Generators" (according to the Washington Post) and have a schedule for pairs of armed guards at the 7-11's and other key spots, feeding and "Warming Centers". Kosky just announced his survivalist bunker, excuse me, command center.

Too bad they didn't go with the "Y2K Success!" name that you came up with.

By moving to Texas, like Ed Yourdon you're one small notch more doomer than the official government action. For some reason, that makes you a target.

I guess because it makes it more real to them. I'm actually taking my own advice rather than telling others to do something that I'm not doing myself.

I wonder why they're not fixated on Kosky's bunker, excuse me, command center, the "Locomotive Sized Generators", the "up to 90 days of water" that the DC hospitals are stockpiling, the armed guards at the 7-11's?
As a moderate, I think a "Van-sized generator", up to 45 days of water, etc. may be sufficient.

Remember, they don't believe anything the government says, as long as it is negative. They only believe the happy face stories. After all, that's what the original Pollyanna did.
By the way, have you ever read the original Pollyanna book? It really is very instructive as to the mentality of the true Pollyanna: everything is spun into a positive light. I think it's probably out of copyright now, so you could quote from it in your newsletter if you wanted to. I'm sure you could find some choice selections to illustrate exactly how far from reality today's Pollyannas really are.

But who can understand the mind of the polly? It may all be driven by pheromones and other chemical signals.

One thing is for sure: it certainly isn't driven by logic!

Y2K Dave:

CPR=MEMES=BULLSH*T. Keep up the good work Steve and don't sweat the small stuff. And believe me cpr is small stuff.

Thanks for your support!

Anita:

Surely you didn't ask this question in seriousness. Was it not you that began a thread entitled "CPR exposes himself"...or something of that nature? Was it not you that brought CPR's credibility to TB2000 both in the thread in which you presented your resume and the thread regarding the "Expert's Opinions"? Wasn't there something else said about "I hope he's reading this or that someone will take it back to him?"

All those things are true. However, they have no bearing on the question of why he is so obsessed with me.

I remember first learning about Debunkers when someone here asked me why someone responded to me at Debunkers. I had no clue the board even existed. I post there now perhaps as regularly as I post to any other Y2k fora. I'm the one who originally posted Geoffrey James' August 2 article at Debunkers. Y2kdave had posted it at TB2000 first, but I thought the article a good one. I was unaware at the time of your previous confrontation with Mr. James.

If you thought that was a good article, then obviously you have no understanding whatsoever of the Y2K problem. It is a tired old rehash of the same fallacies and character assassinations that Mr. James apparently delights in.

Personally, I'd like to see more non-heated discussions regarding the unfolding of Y2k, both on TB2000 AND on Debunkers. Many of us have both spent years remediating systems and several years researching the impact, and drawn different conclusions. These conclusions seem to result in folks being lumped into at least two "camps." The most notable are the optimists and pessimists, although lesser "camps" exist on both sides of this extreme as well as inbetween. I don't think anyone benefits from the "pissing contests" that have resulted....the "I have better qualifications than you.", the "My example trumps your example." Those that choose to engage in these contests can expect to receive in kind that of which they dish out.

I have seen some useful discussions on this bulletin board. All I have seen CPR posting on "debunker" is character assassination and incoherent ranting. Therefore, I suggest that if you're interested in having useful discussions, you take it up with CPR.

I don't know to whom you refer when you use the term "stooges." Since I post on occasion to Debunkers, am I included as a CPR stooge? Since I post on occasion to TB2000, does that make me a Yourdonite? I think not, but I can't speak for you.

I certainly wouldn't call you a "Yourdonite", as you don't seem to provide any useful information in your posts here. As to your being a stooge, that would be up to you. Do you engage in character assassination and other completely negative and unfounded attacks on anyone who disagrees with your "everything will be fine or at most will be a bump in the road" position, for the purpose of supporting CPR? If so, I would call you a stooge. If not, then not.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

Perhaps Mr. Reuben is "RUNNING SCARED".

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 04, 1999.

HA HA HA! just did a qwuik reading thru the archives at de-bunking y2k; guess who attacked CPR 'annonimously' then later admitted to it?

HAH! time for you to go back under you rock, stevo-roonie!

-- tattlle tale (narc@narc.com), August 04, 1999.

I think that the reason people follow your posts is because you (along with Ed, Corey and Lane Core) are excellent examples of how people who work with computers think they know far more about technical subjects outside of their field then they really do.

One of the more interesting things is how many erroneous assumptions you make. You say that things were automated in the 50's and the people who did it are retired or dead. The problem is you are off by two to three decades. Try the 70's and 80's and the people are still very much around, thank you. The 50's? Yea Gods, that was still the era of black and white TV, with tubes yet! But you seem to think the power system was automated back then!

You go on to state that things can't be run manually, only shut down. But there is nothing in your biography that even hints that you ever worked in a power plant or have any utility experience at all. This web site is full of people who have no technical experience other than programming yet feel that somehow that makes them qualified to comment on everything. And they want to be taken seriously!

You talk about transmission grid software. HUH! Ive been in the business for over 25 years and Ive never heard of anything even remotely like that.

You and the others dont have a clue as to what you are talking about but you go on and on building fantasies based on your false assumptions on how power plants and the grid works. Talk about a house of cards and people who dont get it!

-- The Engineer (The Engineer@tech.com), August 04, 1999.

Tattlle tale:

HA HA HA! just did a qwuik reading thru the archives at de-bunking y2k; guess who attacked CPR 'annonimously' then later admitted to it?
HAH! time for you to go back under you rock, stevo-roonie!

Yes, I did debunk him anonymously at first. That was because I wasn't sure whether all of his violent rhetoric was just words or whether he was actually physically dangerous. After being convinced that he was just a harmless lunatic rather than a dangerous one, I didn't have any reservations about admitting who I was.
Now it's time for all of the anonymous trolls who post here (like you, for example) to follow my lead and tell us who you really are. I'm waiting.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

It spells like Cherri.

-- Hanging (out@the.cherri.picker), August 04, 1999.

The Engineer:

You and the others dont have a clue as to what you are talking about but you go on and on building fantasies based on your false assumptions on how power plants and the grid works. Talk about a house of cards and people who dont get it!

No, I don't have any utility experience. But I'm not at all reassured either by the vague promises provided by NERC or by my brother-in-law's comments to me a few weeks ago. He is a power plant engineer, and told me that although he believes their plant is okay, he's not at all certain that the railroads will be able to deliver coal reliably. He also told me that Texas Utilities has not updated all of their SCADA systems and that some of the ones they are using are not Y2K compliant. When I talked to him about Y2K last year, he brushed it off. This year, he didn't.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

Q. What remediation work has been identified as a result of assessment and testing of equipment in the Transmission Business Unit? The current transmission system control and data acquisition software and hardware (SCADA) has been tested and determined to be Y2K Ready. However, a new system is scheduled to be fully operational by the Fall of 1999. This new system is currently undergoing Y2K testing.

-- (The Engineer@tech.com), August 04, 1999.

Q. What remediation work has been identified as a result of assessment and testing of equipment in the Transmission Business Unit? The current transmission system control and data acquisition software and hardware (SCADA) has been tested and determined to be Y2K Ready. However, a new system is scheduled to be fully operational by the Fall of 1999. This new system is currently undergoing Y2K testing.

The above is from TU's web site. Does your brother in law work for the railroads? Why does what he have to say about the railroads carry any more weight than what you have to say about Utilities?

Again this is a case of people getting out of their area of expertise and thinking they know more then they do.

-- The Engineer (The Engineer@tech.com), August 04, 1999.

Maybe, Steve, because you and CPR are opposite sides of THE SAME COIN. I mean, all this sneaking around across different forums, posting under various aliases, etc., etc.

Why don't you try just being yourself and posting what you really believe, hang CPR and the rest. If that doesn't work, try changing your perfume. (Gawd, this thread is stupid.)

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), August 04, 1999.

The Engineer:

Does your brother in law work for the railroads? Why does what he have to say about the railroads carry any more weight than what you have to say about Utilities?

The reason why what he has to say about the railroads matters is that they are one of the main suppliers to power company he works for. They have never been reliable suppliers in the entire time he has worked there, which spans decades. They have paid millions in contract penalties for late delivery of coal, without Y2K as an excuse. What do you think their chances are of delivering coal reliably next year? He isn't very confident about that, so I see no reason for me to be confident either.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

King of Spain:

Maybe, Steve, because you and CPR are opposite sides of THE SAME COIN. I mean, all this sneaking around across different forums, posting under various aliases, etc., etc.

I'm not posting under any aliases, and I'm not sneaking around. I'm posting here under my own name -- just like you.

Why don't you try just being yourself and posting what you really believe, hang CPR and the rest. If that doesn't work, try changing your perfume. (Gawd, this thread is stupid.)

I am posting what I believe -- that CPR is obsessed with me for some reason. The question is why?
Now about some mud wrestling?

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

HAH ha! it looks like hellers html coding is as expert as his y2k opinun!

-- doofus (you@re.goofus), August 04, 1999.

It sounds like they (The RR) will have problems y2k or no y2k. If anything goes wrong next year will it automatically be y2k? How do you know it won't be their usual bad service? If the plant stocks up with extra weeks or months of coal won't that lesson the problem?

Why is their bad service tolerable normally but not tolerable in May of 2000? It's that kind of logic I don't understand.

King of Spain. I'm surprised that you didnt ask either one of us to mud wrestle. And why are you wasting you time with such a stupid thread? Dont tell me Im sure I can guess.

-- The Engineer (The Engineer@tech.com), August 04, 1999.

The Engineer:

It sounds like they (The RR) will have problems y2k or no y2k. If anything goes wrong next year will it automatically be y2k? How do you know it won't be their usual bad service? If the plant stocks up with extra weeks or months of coal won't that lesson the problem? Why is their bad service tolerable normally but not tolerable in May of 2000? It's that kind of logic I don't understand.

What you don't seem to understand is that any Y2K problems that they have will not be instead of their normal problems but in addition to them. It is widely known that many railroads' computer systems have been royally fouled up for a long time. I think it stretches the bounds of credulity to assume that companies that cannot get their systems working under normal circumstances will be able to fix them for Y2K.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

What or whom sounds like a Cherri? Somebody missing me perhaps?

And Mr. Heller do you have any spurces you can point to on the Rail software being messed up. You saying "it is a commonly known fact" does not make it so.

And admit it, you started this thread because you like the attention.

That is pretty common though for people with ego problems, they get a little attention, enjoy it and wanna keep it coming.

Now you can post: Why's she picking on me??? What did I do??? Who does she think she is anyway??? Oh poor, picked on me, come on people stand up for me again and feed my ego, say things like:

Face it Steve, you're a credible realist. You have a strong technical background, specific expertise, >/blink>and even though I haven't seen you detailed it, obviously considerable experience in programming in a wide range of situations.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), August 04, 1999.

Mr. Heller:

Gary North has some words of wisdom for you: "when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."

-- NOT Gary (NOTgnorth@garynorth.con), August 04, 1999.

1995 web page that is not updated proves your point?

Try this: If you go to the site they give information in great detail about what, who, when etc.

This site has very good information. I suggest a look at the FAQ's also, they answer a lot of questions people have been asking.

http://www.uprr.com/y2k/2kfaq.shtml

Will highway crossing warning systems be affected by the Year 2000?

What conversion methods are being used? What tools is Union Pacific using for the Year 2000 Project?

Has Union Pacific's independent accountant reviewed the Year 2000 plan?

Have any outside agencies reviewed Union Pacific's Year 2000 plan? ******************************** Union Pacific Railroad Year 2000 Project Status ~Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure

http://www.uprr.com/y2k/2kprojct.shtml

Year 2000 Project Status Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure (Last edited February 9, 1999) snip

Union Pacific decided the best way to approach this complex enterprise-wide project was to divide it into five sub-projects, and develop enterprise Year 2000 contingency plans:

Mainframe Systems Client Server Systems User Department Developed Systems Vendor Supplied Software, Hardware & Embedded Systems Electronic Commerce and EDI Systems Year 2000 Contingency Plans

Current Project Status

1.Mainframe Systems

Union Pacific's enterprise-wide mainframe systems are essential to the business. All of these systems were converted, tested, implemented, and certified Y2K ready in 1998. Periodic audits are planned during 1999 to ensure that no new Year 2000 date problems are introduced into these already certified systems.

snip 2.Client Server Systems Currently, over 50% of all client server systems are certified. All of the railroad's critical client server systems were converted, tested, and certified as Y2K ready in 1998. The non-critical client server systems are scheduled to be certified by mid-1999.

3.User Department Developed Systems

This category includes mainframe and PC-based systems developed by internal user departments. Headed by a coordinator within each area, approximately 96% of these systems were converted, tested, and certified Y2K ready as of December 31, 1998, and the remaining 4% are mostly low-priority systems that are scheduled to be completed in the first half of 1999.

4.Vendor Supplied Software, Hardware & Embedded Systems snip

Union Pacific is working with connecting short line and regional railroads via involvement in various Association of American Railroad ("AAR") committees. In cooperation with the AAR, Union Pacific is sharing information on the compliance and testing of safety critical components common to the industry. Union Pacific helped fund the development of a shared web site for this purpose, and access to this information is available to other participating railroads.

snip

To assure safety and Y2K readiness, selected critical software, hardware, and embedded systems are being tested by Union Pacific, even if the vendor has already certified the product.

snip

The railroad industry's Y2K EDI transaction standard was implemented in late 1998, and the railroad can now transmit and receive the new EDI standard, which involves a 4-digit year. Union Pacific took a very active role with the AAR in testing the new standards with other railroads and with its trading partners. Since many companies will continue to use 2-digit years, Union Pacific will continue to support older versions of EDI transactions and interpret the 2-digit year to the appropriate century for its internal applications.

Year 2000 Contingency Planning

The contingency plans also include a Year 2000 command center staffed 24 hours a day in the fourth quarter of 1999 and continuing into early 2000 for any problems that might occur due to Y2K. The staff will be comprised of technical experts to fix or advise what to fix if systems fail, and knowledgeable representatives from each business unit. Although Union Pacific expects and has planned for January 1, 2000 to be just another day, contingency plans will be ready to implement just in case.

--

And please expand on what you mean when you say :

On the other hand, I also don't take it lightly when people attack me for no reason. Quite a few people have tried doing that on the Internet, and so far all of them except Reuben have eventually figured out that it doesn't pay to mess with me. Should I be scared or something? As for paying I am not after money.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), August 04, 1999.

Cherri:

You have posted about Union Pacific Railway, not about Norfolk Southern, the one I referred to. However, even the WWW site you've selected leaves some unanswered questions. Here's just one paragraph that has holes in it you could drive a truck through.

Union Pacific has asked nearly 350 essential suppliers to provide the Y2K status of their internal systems, and currently has responses from all of these suppliers indicating they have a solid Y2K project plan. Suppliers must ensure that they will continue to provide products and services to Union Pacific beyond the year 1999. Alternate suppliers are being identified as part of the contingency plan.

In other words, their suppliers have told them that they're working on it, not that they are finished. It's August 1999. Why aren't they finished? What makes you believe they will be finished?

Why hasn't the railroad already identified alternate suppliers who are finished? I'll answer that one: because there aren't any.

I could go on, but there's no point. Either you get it, or you don't.

And please expand on what you mean when you say :
"On the other hand, I also don't take it lightly when people attack me for no reason. Quite a few people have tried doing that on the Internet, and so far all of them except Reuben have eventually figured out that it doesn't pay to mess with me."
Should I be scared or something?

The only thing you should be scared of is making a fool of yourself in public. But that obviously doesn't bother you, so never mind.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

Wow, Mr. Engineer cruises by and hits the nail on the head. Yes, a huge part of the Y2K hysteria is due to the speculations of putative experts outside their area of expertise.

This happens on a number of levels. First you have charlatans, like Scary Gary for example, who has managed to convince a number of people that his esoteric background in history somehow qualifies him as a computer expert - NOT! Then you have the guys who did a bit of programming many, many moons ago and have moved on to greener pastures, but still think they are pros. The epitome of this was Allan Greenspan, testifying to congress about the potential impact of Y2K recently, going off on a tangent and waxing nostalgically about a bit of Cobol code that he diddled in the early 60s.

Then you have the guys who have stayed in the business, but no longer want to get their hands dirty. Yourdon sounds practically proud when he says he is no longer a programmer. Unfortunately for him, whatever plane it is he thinks he has graduated to, it has not protected him from predictions that have proved spectacularly wrong. Decline and Fall of the American Programmer? The famous flying pigs crack about problems after April 1? How about Capers Jones, chief scientist and bottle washer at Software Productivity Research, who predicted that 2,500,000 systems would not be fixed in time for the introduction of the Euro. Big software projects are always late, don't you know? Perhaps, like Ed, he underestimated the ability of those sneaky Europeans to hide their problems.

Finally, and most sadly, you have the ones who apparently still do programming of some kind, but have their snoots so far up their core dumps that their perspective on the big picture is terminally obscured. What they all have in common is that they all thunder on about their resumes and extensive computer experience, yet they don't seem to have actually worked in hands-on Y2K remediation.

The other day Bryce started a thread, asking what I thought was a very reasonable question. He asked for programmers with HANDS ON (his emphasis) knowledge of Y2K bugs to comment on how serious the problems were that they had dealt with, how easy to work around etc. So did Sysman amaze us with any 31 year old assembly code? No such luck. How about something from the stalwart Andyosaurus? Nope. How about something from Lane -nobody knows what's going to happen except me, and I don't even know - Core? Zip. For that matter, what about Steve C+++++ Heller (or as Uncle Ed calls him, Mini-Me)? Nada. Seems that all these forum blowhards are good at talking the talk, but have trouble with walking the walk.

Back to Mr. Heller, lest we drift too far off topic. He wants to know why CPR has singled him out for a generous dollop of his unstinting, and highly effective, ridicule. I'm more interested in why this bugs Heller so much. Could it have something to do with not being invited onto Russ Kelly's panel of experts, unlike his idols North, Yourdon and Hamasaki, and, (gulp) the infamous CPR? Hasn't Mr. Kelly read Heller's voluminous resume that he talks about at every opportunity? I mean, it wasn't enough to put a link to it in a recent thread, later he pasted the whole thing in there. We are supposed to be impressed with Heller's list of published books, but I am reminded by what Philip Greenspun, the author of the software which actually runs this shindig had to say on the subject: "since publishers don't pay real money for computer books, the only people who are attracted to work as authors are the clueless and unemployed". Interesting that Heller has submitted a number of his books to Dr. Dobbs, but nobody in that citadel of geekdom has deemed any of them to be worth reviewing. Alas, many are called, but few are chosen. Perhaps just as well, we all remember what they had to say about the above noted TB2000.

So here is a solution Mr. Heller. Since you did not get the opportunity to stick your neck out on Kelly's site, why don't you do it, right here, right now, on this thread? Since you are predicting that the economy will grind to a halt and millions will die from cold and disease, I'd expect something tenish, but far be it for me to put words, or ratings, into your mouth.

I'll do my bit for Y2K preparation and lay in a large supply of crow. Then we'll see who is going to eat it next winter, you, or CPR.

 

P.S. Better watch it with the editing macros, or we'll get another lecture from Professor Cook about the HTML bug that ate San Francisco.

-- Computer Pro (first_minister@email.com), August 04, 1999.

Computer Pro:

Back to Mr. Heller, lest we drift too far off topic. He wants to know why CPR has singled him out for a generous dollop of his unstinting, and highly effective, ridicule. I'm more interested in why this bugs Heller so much.

His "ridicule" is effective in only one way: It exposes what a moron he is. It doesn't bother me in the least.

Could it have something to do with not being invited onto Russ Kelly's panel of experts, unlike his idols North, Yourdon and Hamasaki, and, (gulp) the infamous CPR? Hasn't Mr. Kelly read Heller's voluminous resume that he talks about at every opportunity? I mean, it wasn't enough to put a link to it in a recent thread, later he pasted the whole thing in there.

The reason I put it in the thread was so that no one could claim they hadn't seen it. If people want to argue about who's best qualified to estimate the effects of Y2K, and in particular to claim that people without significant programming experience are unqualified to make such estimates, then I'll point out my qualifications.

We are supposed to be impressed with Heller's list of published books, but I am reminded by what Philip Greenspun, the author of the software which actually runs this shindig had to say on the subject: "since publishers don't pay real money for computer books, the only people who are attracted to work as authors are the clueless and unemployed".

I'm sure my publisher will be surprised to hear that they don't pay "real money" for computer books. It's possible to make a living writing computer books, as I have done for a couple of years, although it's somewhat difficult because the publishers don't spend money on promotion. In any event, Philip Greenspun, as you may or may not be aware, is also a computer book author, so I guess what he's saying is that he is clueless and unemployed. Far be it from me to argue with him about a topic on which he has first-hand knowledge.

Interesting that Heller has submitted a number of his books to Dr. Dobbs, but nobody in that citadel of geekdom has deemed any of them to be worth reviewing. Alas, many are called, but few are chosen.

I suppose you haven't read my resume (no, I'm not going to post it here), or you would know that I have actually been published in that magazine. I suspect that the main reason they haven't reviewed my books is that most of them are for beginners, whereas their target audience is experienced programmers. If you have other information, I'd be glad to hear it.

Perhaps just as well, we all remember what they had to say about the above noted TB2000.

Since my books are technical in nature, I doubt they would be quite as uninformed in their comments about my books.

So here is a solution Mr. Heller. Since you did not get the opportunity to stick your neck out on Kelly's site, why don't you do it, right here, right now, on this thread? Since you are predicting that the economy will grind to a halt and millions will die from cold and disease, I'd expect something tenish, but far be it for me to put words, or ratings, into your mouth. I'll do my bit for Y2K preparation and lay in a large supply of crow. Then we'll see who is going to eat it next winter, you, or CPR.

I expect something around 9 to 10. I'm trying to prepare for a 10, but I realize that that is a very problematic situation to prepare for. I'm hoping it won't be that bad.
If it turns out to be nothing, or even a "bump in the road", I'll be amazed. And you can put that down as a firm prediction.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

Heller I think what Dino said in his other messages may apply to you too. Come the first of the year you should probably think about finding a good hiding place because there just may be a few people looking to nail your butt to the outhouse door. You can enjoy all this limelight now, but when TS doesn't HTF, and it isn't TEOTWAWKI, they will want to know why. They will want to know why they lost a good portion of their investments in gold and generators and beans. Like the man said these people will be armed and full of beans. I am glad they wont be looking for me.

-- (a@aaaa.hole), August 04, 1999.

I JUST GI'ED Y HELLER IS A 10!

He says he's done y2k remediation.

He has an astronomical ego, and so assumes everyone else's work will be similar to his.

If his fixes were anything like his hyper text mark-up, no wonder he is worried [we all KNOW that is a valid comparison because Mr. Cook goes on and on about HTML failures being comparable to y2k, so this is not debatable]

I am so glad I finally "got it"! It is nice to understand why the 10+ people are so worried and think we are all going to sit in a big cowpie!

Sincerly (using TB2K logic algorythms),

-- IRONy MAN (marvel@comic.book), August 04, 1999.

Steve, I didn't mean to come across as gruff as I may have sounded earlier. My point was that CPR and the rest of the Bonkers crowd are a bunch of paranoid delusional psycho types that are likely to "go bonkers" anytime about anything or anyone. Mimicking that kind of behavior, even lightly (and the title to this thread must be like a red flag waving in front of a bull), is only going to set them off more (as verified by the number of moronic Bonkers trolls that have already posted to this thread).

Time is short, dude. CPR et al are history, they are just too stupid to know it yet. Live and let die.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), August 04, 1999.

Irony man:

I JUST GI'ED Y HELLER IS A 10! He says he's done y2k remediation.

I've never said I've done Y2K remediation. Therefore, the rest of your post is irrelevant.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

a@aaaa.hole:

Heller I think what Dino said in his other messages may apply to you too. Come the first of the year you should probably think about finding a good hiding place because there just may be a few people looking to nail your butt to the outhouse door. You can enjoy all this limelight now, but when TS doesn't HTF, and it isn't TEOTWAWKI, they will want to know why. They will want to know why they lost a good portion of their investments in gold and generators and beans. Like the man said these people will be armed and full of beans. I am glad they wont be looking for me.

Everyone is responsible for his own actions. If people lose money buying gold or making other preparations, that's unfortunate.

However, if I had to choose between being under prepared and possibly losing my life or being over prepared and possibly losing money, I know which I would choose. If your money is more important to than your life, then you might make the opposite decision.

In any event, "doomers" are independent thinkers and individualists. I'm not worried about them blaming me for their own actions. It's Pollys who do things like that.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

King of Spain:

Steve, I didn't mean to come across as gruff as I may have sounded earlier. My point was that CPR and the rest of the Bonkers crowd are a bunch of paranoid delusional psycho types that are likely to "go bonkers" anytime about anything or anyone. Mimicking that kind of behavior, even lightly (and the title to this thread must be like a red flag waving in front of a bull), is only going to set them off more (as verified by the number of moronic Bonkers trolls that have already posted to this thread).

Time is short, dude. CPR et al are history, they are just too stupid to know it yet. Live and let die.

You're right, of course. But one of those morons has given me an idea for another good thread: namely, how many people are going to blame others for "making" them prepare?

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 04, 1999.

Mr. Heller:

I just perused this thread and you stated that you've NOT engaged in any remediation? Where EXACTLY, then, DOES your skillset lie regarding your prophecies? I've asked this same question on Debunkers. WHO exactly ARE you, and why is YOUR experience any better than anyone else's?

You don't like Geoffrey James, apparently, yet he's a frequent writer for Datamation...an IT rag. You seem hostile to ANYONE who doesn't agree with your philosophies (as evidenced by your responses in this thread.) Yet you have the audacity to ask why Charles questions every post you make?

I'm sorry, sir, but I just don't get the connection. I can understand why remediators don't agree on the unfolding of Y2k, but I certainly don't understand why you position yourself to be some sortof expert on Y2k when you haven't even engaged in the experience.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), August 04, 1999.

Lest anyone feels I'm an "undercover" agent for Debunkers, here is the thread to which I addressed the question regarding "Who is Mr. Heller?"

Charles states that Heller lied about his concerns

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), August 05, 1999.

Anita:

I just perused this thread and you stated that you've NOT engaged in any remediation? Where EXACTLY, then, DOES your skillset lie regarding your prophecies? I've asked this same question on Debunkers. WHO exactly ARE you, and why is YOUR experience any better than anyone else's?

Who am I? See my resume for answer to that question. Why is my experience better than anyone else's? Probably because I've been involved with computer systems of varying complexity for my entire adult life. Of course, there are others with experience as good as or better than mine: Ed Yourdon, for example, is in the latter category.

You don't like Geoffrey James, apparently, yet he's a frequent writer for Datamation...an IT rag.

And your point is?

You seem hostile to ANYONE who doesn't agree with your philosophies (as evidenced by your responses in this thread.)

I'm not sure what you mean by "my philosophies". I have no enmity toward those who merely have a difference of opinion with me about the potential danger of Y2K. One of us is going to be right or maybe both of us will be wrong, but that doesn't make us enemies. The only people I'm hostile to are those who belittle, attack and impugn the motives of anyone who dares to claim that Y2K is a serious threat.

Yet you have the audacity to ask why Charles questions every post you make?

I have no idea what you're talking about here. As far as I know, I'm much more qualified than Charles Reuben is to discuss Y2K. If he knows as much or more about programming than I do, I'd be amazed. Of course, I haven't seen his resume. Perhaps you know where I could see a copy of it?

I'm sorry, sir, but I just don't get the connection. I can understand why remediators don't agree on the unfolding of Y2k, but I certainly don't understand why you position yourself to be some sortof expert on Y2k when you haven't even engaged in the experience.

So your position is that only those who are Y2K remediators are qualified to speak about it? If so, please provide some details of Charles Reubens' Y2K remediation experience.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 05, 1999.

Anita:

Okay, you and Charles have asked for it, so you're going to get it. Here's the relevant part of his post:

I met Heller and his wife at a DFW/DAMA meeting, he has my business card and phone number and had no reason to suggest that I am in any way violent. OTOH, I do believe this is good evidence of his current mental condition.

It was obvious to me on meeting Charles Reuben that he was mentally unbalanced, and I said as much to my wife. Of course at the time I did not have any idea of the magnitude of his lunacy. That's because if he usually acted as crazy in real life as he does on the "Debunking" board, he would've been locked up long ago. However, after my initial exposure to his rantings and verbal assaults on the "Debunking" board, I resolved not to come into personal contact with him again, as I was concerned that he would become physically violent. In fact, I have stopped going to those meetings for that reason. So you can see that I wasn't lying about my reason for posting anonymously.

I've since decided that it's not terribly dangerous to tangle with him on the Internet, since it is unlikely that he will deliberately seek me out to commit physical violence against me. But I certainly am not planning to come into physical proximity to him in the future.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 05, 1999.

Who am I? See my resume for answer to that question. Why is my experience better than anyone else's? Probably because I've been involved with computer systems of varying complexity for my entire adult life. Of course, there are others with experience as good as or better than mine: Ed Yourdon, for example, is in the latter category.

I've ALSO been involved with computer systems all my entire adult life, sir. So have many here...so have many on Debunkers. Does this make us special? *I* don't think so.

You don't like Geoffrey James, apparently, yet he's a frequent writer for Datamation...an IT rag. And your point is?

My point is that you aren't known to anyone in IT as an authority. James, apparently, is known to many in IT. Of course I can say the same about myself...or Cory...NOBODY in IT knows who we are...nor does anyone care. We're just plebes doing our jobs.

You seem hostile to ANYONE who doesn't agree with your philosophies (as evidenced by your responses in this thread.) I'm not sure what you mean by "my philosophies". I have no enmity toward those who merely have a difference of opinion with me about the potential danger of Y2K. One of us is going to be right or maybe both of us will be wrong, but that doesn't make us enemies. The only people I'm hostile to are those who belittle, attack and impugn the motives of anyone who dares to claim that Y2K is a serious threat.

I didn't see that in THIS thread, sir. I saw you lashing out at anyone/everyone who questioned and throwing praise in the direction of those who didn't question.

Yet you have the audacity to ask why Charles questions every post you make? I have no idea what you're talking about here. As far as I know, I'm much more qualified than Charles Reuben is to discuss Y2K. If he knows as much or more about programming than I do, I'd be amazed. Of course, I haven't seen his resume. Perhaps you know where I could see a copy of it?

Most folks don't throw their resumes onto a public forum as you have. I know *I* certainly wouldn't. I do believe that the Kelly site cites Charles' credentials. Since you met him in person, it's unclear why you're even asking these questions.

You then responded with:

"So your position is that only those who are Y2K remediators are qualified to speak about it? If so, please provide some details of Charles Reubens' Y2K remediation experience."

I think LOTS of folks can speak about Y2k, but I suspect that remediators know more truths than others. I don't stand lock-step with Charles in ANYTHING he says, or what anyone ELSE says on either THIS forum or Debunkers. My posts speak for themselves. I oftentimes disagree with folks on BOTH fora. We're all trying to get at the truth here, and I haven't seen you contributing to that truth.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), August 05, 1999.

Anita:

Ho, hum. Just more of your usual wordy nonsense that doesn't answer any of my points. Sorry, I have better things to do with my time than explain the same things over and over to someone who obviously has her mind made up. Have a nice Y2K.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 05, 1999.

Mr. Heller:

LOL. I answered ALL of your points. I simply didn't answer with the responses you desired?

It IS, however, good timing to end this one.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), August 05, 1999.

BWWWAAAhahah wait just one minute! Hell-hole says he isn't involved in y2k remediation, but knows more than those who are?

You make a dandy Gary clone. Maybe you should have remained anonymous.

-- Pot (kettle@bla.ck), August 05, 1999.

Sorry Anita,

The resume is a real winner.

Sure, there's no remediation experience, but he's worked in MANY different industries over the years including finance and DoD.

I'd say that he qualifies as a computer expert.

-- nothere nothere (notherethere@hotmail.com), August 05, 1999.

Mr. Heller, I didn't think your resume was very impressive at all. You seem to have a talant for making a maountain out of a mole hill. It reminds me of how the talants of a housewife and mother can be manipulated to look like corperate management. Actually a housewife and mother HAS the talant to be in corperate management more than most collage graduates of management. So you wrote some simple little software, perhaps, or you used data processing to make makes some routines. Pretty simple stuff where I come from. If you have such a long history of doing this, from the mid 1970's, were you writing them Y2K compliant? with 4 digit years? If not why not? didn't you know enough to realise they would have a problem come 2000? When did you "catch on?"

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), August 06, 1999.

Cherri:

Mr. Heller, I didn't think your resume was very impressive at all. You seem to have a talant for making a maountain out of a mole hill.

Since you obviously have no idea whatsoever of what makes a resume impressive or unimpressive, I can only suggest that you print my resume out and show it to someone who knows something about computer programming. An excellent person to show it to would be a recruiter (that means someone who tries to find people for jobs).

It reminds me of how the talants of a housewife and mother can be manipulated to look like corperate management. Actually a housewife and mother HAS the talant to be in corperate management more than most collage graduates of management. So you wrote some simple little software, perhaps, or you used data processing to make makes some routines. Pretty simple stuff where I come from.

Your writing indicates a total lack of precision in your thinking. Therefore, I can conclude that your ability in programming is minuscule.

If you have such a long history of doing this, from the mid 1970's, were you writing them Y2K compliant? with 4 digit years? If not why not? didn't you know enough to realise they would have a problem come 2000? When did you "catch on?"

Most of my programming has been at the systems level rather than at the user interface level, and has not involved dates. As far as I can recall, I have not written any noncompliant code in the last 10 years.

Please let me know when you have shown my resume to a recruiter for programming jobs. Until then, I'm not going to answer any more of your completely uninformed posts.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 06, 1999.

Cherri: Mr. Heller, I didn't think your resume was very impressive at all. You seem to have a talant for making a maountain out of a mole hill. Since you obviously have no idea whatsoever of what makes a resume impressive or unimpressive, I can only suggest that you print my resume out and show it to someone who knows something about computer programming. An excellent person to show it to would be a recruiter (that means someone who tries to find people for jobs).

No Heller it is obviouse that I have a good idea of how resumes are "padded". I was not pointing out the "quality" of how it was written anyway, I was pointing out the lack of substance in your background. Take away all of the "padding" in your resume and you have done what? Used a sort/merge routine? Been there when equipment and COTS was selected? You sound like a grunt who can talk the talk, but has such a difficult time concieving of the flow processing takes that you feel it is great when you do some little program on your own. When my eldest daughter was six, she too could write programs in basic. Of course any recruiter would just love your resume, considering they know nothing of what you actually did. But it LOOKS good. Recruiters look for keywords and you have done a pretty good job of having plenty of them in your resume.

It reminds me of how the talants of a housewife and mother can be manipulated to look like corperate management. Actually a housewife and mother HAS the talant to be in corperate management more than most collage graduates of management. So you wrote some simple little software, perhaps, or you used data processing to make makes some routines. Pretty simple stuff where I come from.

Your writing indicates a total lack of precision in your thinking. Therefore, I can conclude that your ability in programming is minuscule.

You have such a huge colection of statements like that which leads me to believe you have had to build one up in a defensive responce to people belittling you, or treating you like a dork. Now I actually feel sorry for you.... You are one of those people who try really hard to do things others seem to do without any effort. You appear to have a talant for verbal defensiveness, you really would do good in political speachwriting. They have a big need for people who can do a lot of talking without actually saying anything.

If you have such a long history of doing this, from the mid 1970's, were you writing them Y2K compliant? with 4 digit years? If not why not? didn't you know enough to realise they would have a problem come 2000? When did you "catch on?" Most of my programming has been at the systems level rather than at the user interface level, and has not involved dates. As far as I can recall, I have not written any noncompliant code in the last 10 years.

The reason you had to attempt to "recall" was that at the time you never thought about Y2K which is exactly what almost everyone else did, not think about it, not realise there could be a problem. Normal.

Please let me know when you have shown my resume to a recruiter for programming jobs.

Hey.. Do your own job search, I'm not doing your looking for you!

Until then, I'm not going to answer any more of your completely uninformed posts.

Another one of your "snappy" combacks! But you should use one more appropriate to what I wrote. -- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 06, 1999.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), August 06, 1999.