New 9-2-99 Updated Navy Master Utility List (Jim Lord)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

For anyone who cares, the Navy just updated the Master Utility List. Haven't got around to looking through it just yet. It is now in HTML format, as well, or you can download the excel spreadsheet.

URL: http://www.nfesc.navy.mil/y2k/utilinfo/Master-Util-9_2.html

Still waiting for the June one to pop up on Jim Lord's site like he said it would.

-- Mr. Details (Details@detail.com), September 03, 1999

Answers

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001L4X Ann seems to make a good point if you are so interested.

Are you some kind of goverent plant or something out to discredit Jim Lord and this info he posted? What is your purpose in repeatedly posting about Jim Lord with this arrogance of "still waiting" and "Mr. Details"? You seem to be buying the Navy Spin rather quickly,you haven't even read it yet, but you want Jim Lord to keep on proving to you!

-- Who can that be knocking at my door (go away don't@come round here no .more), September 03, 1999.


Who...

No, I am not a government plant set out to discredit Jim Lord. I am just holding him to his word. I believe this is a very important topic and document, and want to keep awareness up on this board so it doesn't fall off. I am taking his advice, in fact, as I said in the post the other day. I am going back to the facts. But I'm still waiting for the COMPLETE facts. Is this so wrong?

Bottom line: The navy has put up this "new and improved" spreadsheet. I view it with a great amount of skepticism. However, it is going on two weeks since Mr. Lord said he would post the original June 99 spreadsheet. Without this original document, I cannot fully analyze the new one(s). What good is a comparison without a baseline?

As to my handle, is the fact that I like to look at the details a bad thing in your mind? I always thought the devil was in them.

-- Mr. Details (Details@detail.com), September 03, 1999.


Per BARTLETT'S FAMILIAR QUOTATIONS, the original aphorism is actually "God is in the details", a favorite of the architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and the art historian Aby Warburg; attributed ["Le bon Dieu est dan le detail"] to Gustave Flaubert but without verification.

Fittingly in this post-modernist age, it has become "The Devil is in the details", possibly owing to a modern sense that "God is dead"; that there's significant challenge, struggle and even potential "evil" (risk, etc.) in the analysis, design, and construction of any system; and of course the pleasant alliteration in English of "Devil" and "detail".

Just a detail... 8-}]

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), September 03, 1999.


Jim Lord said he would not post the his June Navy report in it's original form because it's a copy of a copy. Whether he plans to transcribe it is another story.

-- Hiway (Hiway441@aol.com), September 03, 1999.

I don't see why the June report is necessary anyway. The facts are there. The govt. lied, plain and simple. More Navy spin isn't going to change anything.

-- (underneath@the.bunker), September 03, 1999.


Hiway:

This comes from Jim Lord site at www.jimlord.to in the what's new section, dated 8-23-99

(Snip)

"I was asked by email several times why I did not put the June survey up on the Internet. I took this action to be certain not to compromise the individual who provided me with the information. I could not, at that time, take the chance that the appearance and format of the data would in some way implicate my source. Now that the government has provided a copy of the August report, I feel it is safe to post this information. It may be several days, however, before I have access to a facility where I can have the document scanned and converted to a pdf format. I will do this as soon as possible, however, and it will go up on the JimLord.to website unaltered except for some marks in the margins of the document I used for counting purposes."

(Snip)

-- Mr. Details (Details@detail.com), September 03, 1999.


I too look forward to Jim's posting of the June spreadsheet. No one is descrediting Jim, he did it himself when he posted this spreadsheet and claimed it as a "study". I just want to know was he deceived, or did he intentionally deceive? I am interested in whether he had the full LEGEND that clearly shows that the status was based on queries to the utilities, a clear indication that this was not a serious "study". He forgot to post that part...(some have said maybe he didn't have the legend, but he must have had at least part of it to state what the ratings meant.)

Regards, Regards,

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), September 03, 1999.


Yes, I'm aware of that, Mr. Details. But I do recall a discussion where it was mentioned that part of the difficlty in doing so was that the copy didn't scan well. I'll post that if I come across it again.

It doesn't matter if he posted it or not. It's a nice find, good as a limited news grabber and I'm happy Lord posted it, but the Navy report really doesn't say anything.

-- Hiway (Hiway441@aol.com), September 03, 1999.


And when I say "anything," I mean anything new.

-- Hiway (Hiway441@aol.com), September 03, 1999.

My scanner can scan copies of copies in w/b mode with no problem. I've scanned rather messed-up and light copies and enhenced them for viewing/printing using copy quality and darken/lighten features. It's a cheap HP Scanjet. I don't understand what Jim Lord's problem is. If he can read it himself, my Scanjet could too.

I'm not trying to discredit Jim Lord, I respect him, but he is discrediting himself if he doesn't put up the original copy on his site as he said he would.

Mac, I've always taken the expression "the Devil is in the details" to mean that glitches are hidden in missed details. It would make more sense to me to say that God is INTO details (as in God is a detail oriented guy). That's what the french expression means to me.

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), September 03, 1999.



I'm not trying to discredit Jim Lord, I respect him, but he is discrediting himself if he doesn't put up the original copy on his site as he said he would.

Hardly. After all he's been through just getting this out in the open for people to see, it's amazing to see that it's just not enough for some people. What he already revealed speaks volumes - the govt lied and is now spinning this story away. Nothing more really needs to be said, unless you're a polly troll.

-- (underneath@the.bunker), September 03, 1999.


I suppose I am the duty polly/troll, so I'll ask:

How exactly did the government "lie"?

-- Johnny Canuck (j_canuck@hotmail.com), September 03, 1999.


Mr. Underneath the bunker, I assure you that I'm not a polly, nor a troll, and I invite you to read my resume in the archives.

Mr. Lord has certainly done ME a favor, and to a great many of us also, but take into account that he is feeding the real pollies and the DGI's by not following through on his word. He's not just an average poster like most of us are here, he's viewed as an expert with a far reaching reputation. He has obligations to maintain with that reputation.

And you can come out now, it's safe, I don't bite.

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), September 03, 1999.


When I returned to the US last Sunday I was two days from deadline for my newsletter. The day after I finished up that task I drove thirty miles to the nearest Kinko's where I could get the original (June) Navy survey scanned and converted to pdf. Yesterday they called and said the document was too big to fit on a floppy and I would have to bring in a Zip disc. Last evening I drove two hours to Las Vegas to the TV studio where my appearance on C-Span was held. Today I stopped in at Kinko's to pick up my converted document. The computer crew had departed at noon for the three day holiday weekend. I will have to pick up the stuff on Tuesday next then email it to my webmaster. It will be up on mysite at JimLord.to as promised and as soon as I can get it done.

Meanwhile I still have six hundred email messages stacked up waiting to be answered.

Sometimes plain old life gets in the way of getting things done. thanks for your patience.

Jim Lord

-- Jim Lord (JimLordY2K@aol.com), September 04, 1999.


Mr. Lord, thank you for straightening me up! Please know that me and my family are very greatful for all of your FREE hard work you've done to help us unravel Y2K and warn the rest of the population. I knew there had to be a problem from keeping you to follow on your word speedily.

I've watched you and Dr. Gordon on C-Span this morning and was very pleased with the quality of the show. I'm ordering the video from C-Span to show it to my family and friends.

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), September 04, 1999.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ