Confirmed y2k computer glitches--press release : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

A quote from a story published in the Greenville News this date sourced from Associated Press regarding the readiness of the State of South Carolina.

"So far, agencies have reported that 22 systems have experienced some type of y2k related failures. The report said 40 percent of the 689 mission critical applications have back up plans if a key computer system fails."

I am supposed to feel comfortable that 40% of the critical systems have back up plans? Sheesh!!! I happen to know that the systems that have back up plans are ALL some phase of accounting systems such as payroll and tax collection at the state level. The payroll of course is for the legislature and their staff. There is no backup system in place for the myriad numbers of state employees, nor is there a backup system for writing the hundreds of thousands of Medicaid/Worker's Comp/AFDC etc checks should the system tank.

Just who is trying to blow smoke here?

-- Lobo (, August 22, 1999



-- Y2KGardener (, August 22, 1999.

You mean as a group they suffer from incontinence???

I think we should be told.

-- andy (, August 22, 1999.

22 SYSTEMS have failed and the rollover hasn't even happend yet. 60% or 413 of the 689 mission critical applications have NO back up plans

How many days are left?

Thanks Y2k Gardener...that was a fun trick to learn.



-- Michael Taylor (, August 22, 1999.

Mike, to be fair, I believe it stated that 22 systems have experienced a failure, not 22 systems failed. There is a difference and that is why some of the pollys get exercised.

-- enough is (, August 22, 1999.

I love traveling text, music, dancing graphics and all this great technical stuff that's a mystery to me. For someone who grew up in the pre-TV era, it tickles my inner child.

-- gilda (, August 22, 1999.

Gawd! How old ARE you????

-- King of Spain (, August 22, 1999.

"22 systems have experienced some type of y2k related failures"


22 systems have failed...

True "Enough is enough". Point taken and sorry for my error.

Though, I suppose it's really splitting hairs isn't it? If a system has experienced a Y2k related failure then didn't the system fail?

And then the report states that only 40 percent of the 689 mission critical applications have a back up plan if a key computer system "fails".

So, we may be reading this differently. When I read it I get the impression that 22 systems have failed in some form or fashion and that out of those 22 systems it's anyones guess if there was a backup plan if the system failed.

So, maybe they got lucky and all of these 22 systems were among the 40% that had back plans. That would be fairly incredible and with that kind of luck they should get their butts to Vegas.

But, from a realistic point of view, I would guess that at least a percentage of those 22 systems have been suffering fairly badly.

King, can you elaborate a little on your "how old are you?" comment? I must be missing something.



-- Michael Taylor (, August 22, 1999.

KOS : I'd make a comment about your question, but I'm out of kleenex and can't find my stash of paper towel either. Pheeeeewie. Just love this place! Wish I had a sleeve.....

Mike : If I sent you some stats on the motor-home we're selling, could you fix me up with a rolling ad? Love it!

-- Will continue (, August 22, 1999.

two things to notice, and remember:

22 (out of 689 (apparently remediated, tested, and re-installed) state "mission-critical" systems already failed.

ONE. That's just over 3%, which agrees perfectly with the 3-7 percent "new errors introduced" with a change on old software rule of thumb that Ed and others have consistently used.

Therefore, we should expect to see similar results - from systems that are fully remediated adn tested - next Januray and February (and March)

TWO - There is only this one paragraph about the errors - the administration (and its national press corps) will NOT publicize this information.

Since these are a series of local (state) government systems, the local press is going to be more accurate covering their end of things. Also to be expected.

THREE. The impacts (in this case) apparently are relatively minor to date - which is good. We hope more "successful failures" like this occur.

Does this mean the pollies will cease their blather? No. Washington has yet to face problems from systems that are NOT repaired, only from a few which were those repaired incorrectly: or 3% of the total editted.

Now, "non-critical systems" (80% of the total) have not been repaired, inspected, or tested. What will the impact of those probable failures? No one is willing to guess, after all - they are non-critical and so must not be important.


-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (, August 24, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ