How bad will we get hit with "Well, 9/9 was no problem, so Y2K is no problem"???greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
It's 23:30, almost here.
Well, Mr. Yourdon and others may have missed some predictions. But not entirly, since we do have some reports of early failures.
I think you know my feelings. I have said, since before I arrived here in February, that 1999 dates would cause only minor problems.
Last chance for your prediction about 9/9...
Tick... Tock... <:00=
-- Sysman (email@example.com), September 08, 1999
-- Sysman (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 08, 1999.
I've already gotten email from a family member pointing out how this is going to help show that Y2k is "no big deal".
Strange how much publicity THIS issue has gotten, isn't it?
-- Jon Williamson (email@example.com), September 08, 1999.
nada, zip, zilch.
But watch everybody crawl over the nothingness and proclaim it as "proof" Y2K has been solved, is fixed, was a hoax, is all better now. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
More time to wrap up prep loose ends, enjoy the world as it is now.
-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 08, 1999.
Y2K: "Its the Year 2000, Stupid"
And its funny how otherwise supposedly knowledgable pollies suddenly will become very confused as to what the 9/9/99 problem was EVER claimed to be about. "Gee", they will say, "its now September 9, 1999, and there were no embedded chips that caused oil refineries to blow up. The electricity is still on. The phone system still works."
Yeah, its funny how a problem that was NEVER claimed to have anything to do with embedded chips, oil refineries, electricity, and telecommunications, will NOT cause any of those areas to fail. (At best, maybe, in a few weeks, screwy financial application problems might show up. Maybe; "nobody knows".) But the pollies, of course, will take this BS and then proclaim, "THEREFORE, the claim that Y2K problems will start occuring in the year 2000, is obviously groundless!" Pollies = Morons
-- King of Spain (email@example.com), September 08, 1999.
As Ed Yourdon predicted earlier this year, the most likely scenario for y2k is a gradual unwinding of today's business efficiencies resulting in a 10 year depression. The "3-day storm" is a convenient metaphor for those who cannot or will not understand the severity of the y2k effect on the present "bubble mania" economy. Slowly but surely the media, stock market speculators, government officials and the average person will be exposed to the true nature of y2k. They will find that it is indeed a timebomb, but one whos detonation does not take place on a particular date, but rather is an explosion in slow motion, the effects of which are frighteningly cumulative.
-- a (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 08, 1999.
I got an e-mail too about "9999" from a friend of mine this evening, asking for my opinion on it. He said it had been all over the news today. I have a feeling the "optimists" are going to try to make an issue of this, just like they did with the GPS rollover. The irony is that the GPS rollover and "9999" are each their own unique type of glitch that have nothing to do with the "99" and "00" problem commonly known as Y2K.
Also see this thread about the non-importance of September 9th and about groups that will be monitoring it anyway:
My opinion is that the effects of "9999" will be negligible.
-- Linkmeister (email@example.com), September 08, 1999.
It will be horrible. Great cities in flames. Mayhem rules. Dragons crawling out of the sea. The acrid stench of death will choke us all, by tomorrow evening. This will be my last post.
(Hey, if I'm right, I'll be the only one with Neener Neener rights, otherwise...I'll just say I was posting too far past my bedtime.)
-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), September 08, 1999.
Funny....John Lennon saw this day coming....
I stated on another thread that I have seen more press given to this over the past 2 weeks than is "usual". That's because Kosky and cronies "knew" it would be a virtual success story for them. Of course they are going to use this misinformation to "quiet the sheeples". No spooking allowed.
-- karen (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 08, 1999.
Just found this on MSNBC:
Experts: 9/9/99 issue is no Y2K Programming quirk might cause computer shutdowns on Sept. 9, but most think thats unlikely REUTERS Sept. 7 Stand by for another dud millennium computer bug warning. Thursday, Sept. 9 may be represented as 9999 on many computer software programs. In theory this string of nines might disrupt systems and provide a preview of the millennium bug chaos predicted when computer clocks click over into the next century at midnight on Dec. 31, 1999.
MANY PROGRAMMERS ON old computer systems dating mostly from the 1960s used bunches of nines to instruct a computer program to shut down, or prepare for maintenance.
So the theory is that on Thursday, computers will come across a series of nines and grind to a halt, throwing a spanner into the works of a huge range of businesses from banking to electricity generation and car manufacturing.
You can relax, for the next 100-odd days at least.
Experts say there is almost no chance that 9/9/99 will have any impact at all.
The reality is that 9/9/99 is one of the persistent myths of the year 2000 problem. Its not quite a unicorn, not quite 100 percent mythical, weve only been able to identify two instances of 9/9/99 coding in extremely obscure systems, said Andy Kyte, analyst with the U.S. information technology research company Gartner Group. ONE MORE OVERHYPED WARNING?
This looks like becoming another example of a warning of computer chaos that fails to materialize.
So far this year trigger-date warnings which turned out be firing blanks have included April 9, 1999 the 99th day of the year. Jan. 1, 1999 was supposed to be a danger because many contracts, insurance policies and loans would reach ahead one year and trigger the millennium bug.
Before the Dow Jones Industrial Average burst through 10,000 earlier this year, some experts said computer program might be unable to handle the fifth digit in 10,000 correctly.
Either the figure generated very little chaos, or companies and organizations did a great job suppressing bad news.
The popular navigation tool, the satellite-based Global Positioning System, reset its computer clock late last month. Although not strictly a Y2K problem, it was heralded as a threat to light planes and yachts. In the event only a few Japanese taxi drivers using computerized maps apparently had any problems. CRYING WOLF?
But Kyte worries that this string of non-events may induce a fatal degree of complacency ahead of a very real problem at midnight Dec. 31.
This is not going to cause a significant number of failures or breakdowns. But it may well reinforce the complacency of those that currently should be acting to deal with the real year 2000 issues, Kyte said.
The year 2000 (Y2K) computer bug problem stems from the once common programmer practice of using only two digits for the year in dates, such as 97 for 1997. There are fears 2000 will confuse computers and microchips embedded in machines, causing them to produce flawed data or crash. Corporations and governments across the world have been spending billions of dollars to fix their computers.
Tim Johnson, consultant at the technology researcher Ovum, agrees that 9/9/99 will turn out to be a damp squib. DIFFUSE FAILURES, LITTLE ATTENTION
But Johnson said there had been computer problems generated by Y2K trigger dates and Y2K system testing. They generated little publicity because of their diffuse nature, with problems including Swedish customs and passport control hit in Gothenburg, the Bank of Scotland losing its international payments system for a day and Japanese taxi drivers getting lost because of problems contacting the GPS satellite system.
Johnson said that when Dec. 31 arrives, isolated problems are the most likely scenario.
Complacency is a danger, but a lot of people will be able to say what was the fuss all about? Ill be very surprised if there is a critical mass of events which make people say this a disaster, Johnson said. THIS IS JUST A TEST
According to Mitul Mehta, Senior European Research Manager at technology consultant Frost & Sullivan, there will be isolated, small scale problems. He expects many big corporations to use Sept. 9 as an opportunity to test their systems against the Y2K threat.
The U.N.-backed International Y2K Cooperation Center, a global clearing house for millennium bug data, is using Sept. 9 to rehearse a plan to track how the worlds anti-millennium bug plans are stacking up. The outfit will update its web site, www.iy2kcc.org, to show the input of 170 or more national Y2K coordinators.
Gartner Groups Kyte said those looking for explosive evidence of computer failures on 9/9/99, as well as Jan. 1, 2000 are missing the point.
The majority of errors are going to happen in the few weeks running up to (Dec. 31) and a few weeks after, with gradual inefficiency building up over computer networks.
This reinforces the fact that year 2000 is not a pyrotechnic event. Its going to be like putting sand in a Rolls-Royce engine, it isnt going to explode, just work progressively less efficiently, Kyte said.
-- Gayla (email@example.com), September 09, 1999.
So a@aa, are you and Yourdon saying now that even 1/1/2000 is a "red herring" and that we won't big problems on this day, but that we can expect a slow build up of problems over the next few months/years/decades?
This should work....you guys don't have to admit how wrong you are, and can claim any downturn in the economy is due to "hidden" y2k bugs that were never fixed....
I won't make a big deal about 9/9/99, but if 1/1/2000 doesn't bring signficant problems you guys need to admit you are flat out wrong - to all the people that you "Alerted" to the severity of this issue.
-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), September 09, 1999.
I personally think that there will be noticeable problems on January 1st, but January 1st is only part of the problem. Some short-term problems with utilities, medium-term supply-chain slowdowns and a long-term economic impact is a plausible scenario. Even John Koskinen says that all of the problems won't be immediately apparent:
Government's top Y2K expert predicts failures for more than a day 4.42 p.m. ET (2043 GMT) July 29, 1999 By Ted Bridis, Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) Computer failures related to the Year 2000 technology problem could extend well beyond New Year's Day, President Clinton's top Y2K expert said Thursday.
Although John Koskinen predicted a national "sigh of relief'' in the early hours of Jan. 1, he also anticipates scattered electronic failures over the first days, weeks and even months of the new year.
Koskinen, chairman of the President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion, said in an interview with The Associated Press that some failures may not become obvious until the end of January, the first time after the date rollover that consumers review their monthly bank statements, credit-card bills and other financial paperwork.
"It won't evaporate until after that,'' Koskinen said. "Clearly, this is more than a January 1 problem.'' But he also slightly hedged his predictions: "None of us are really going to know until after January 1.''
Unless repaired, some computers originally programmed to recognize only the last two digits of a year will not work properly beginning in 2000, when those machines will assume it is 1900.
Some computer systems may shut down quickly with obvious failures, and others may gradually experience subtle problems or degraded performance that may take weeks to notice.
"The more difficult problem will be where the system looks like it's doing it correctly but it's doing it all wrong,'' Koskinen said.
Some failures won't be recognized until the work week starts Jan. 3, as employees return to their offices and turn on their computers for the first time.
Repaired computers also will need to recognize 2000 as a leap year, even though most years ending in "00'' don't need to adjust for Feb. 29, he said.
A new $40 million Information Coordination Center being organized down the street from the White House will operate until March, sharing information about failures with states, federal agencies, corporations and foreign governments.
-- Linkmeister (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 09, 1999.
We think 1/1/2000 will bring dramatic disasters and it will be downhill from there. The New Millennium will not pad sweetly in like a lamb.
-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (email@example.com), September 09, 1999.
Here's a news article from Australia that's an example of what Sysman was talking about--the use of 9/9/99 to calm fears about January 2000, even though the "nines" problem is a different kind of glitch from what Y2K is:
'All-nines' bug fails to disrupt NSW power
New South Wales' Electricity Association says there has been no disruption to power supplies with today's dawning of September 9, 1999.
Some year 2000 commentators have expressed concern that the 9/9/99 date would cause computer and other data-sensitive equipment problems.
The association says with the date change causing no supply disruptions or quality reductions in New South Wales or the ACT, it is confident there will be no Y2K problems when moving into 2000.
-- Linkmeister (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 09, 1999.
Troll (pollies, not Sysman) alert. I and many others have said 1999-09-09 is/was almost certain to be a non-event.
OTH, 2000-01-01 and on into Y2K could be MAJOR.
Don't pay attention to the pollies "9/9/99 no big deal so Y2K won't be."
-- vbProg (vbProg@MicrosoftAndIntelSuck.com), September 09, 1999.
Predictably, from Nouveau Bonkers.
Please note posting date.
Thursday, 09-Sep-1999 05:44:43
This is by way of an "I'm back from my vacation, and trying to catch up" posting.
I'm also using the advantage of my geographical position to make a timely observation.
It is September 9th.
It is 10:35 GMT
The internet is still here.
This is good news, and although of course it doesn't really prove anything with regard to big-iron systems, it is at least another major milestone mainly passed.
No doubt all and sundry will be scouring the news feeds all day for signs of significant failure, so lest just hope they draw a blank.
Anyway, good to be back, and good to see the situation much as it was the last time I put fingers to keyboard.
Kind Regards, W0lv3r1n3
Just for the record
Thursday, 09-Sep-1999 07:16:41
We did find ONE 9999 problem in ONE ancient Assembly Language program. This is out of a total of probably 150M lines of code.
Am told it would have been a showstopper. Easy to fix, though, since it was only a few lines of code.
So the problem is "real" in the sense that smallpox is real. Eradicated, but real.
Thursday, 09-Sep-1999 10:30:43
I haven't done my morning scan of TB2K, but over the previous few days I caught hints that they were a bit upset because 9999 wouldn't cause any problems.
They still thought of it as an "indicator" and because they said nothing earth-shattering would happen, it was a Bad Thing.
Doesn't matter. It's All Going Away anyway, so nothing we can do about it (except Prepare, of course). To coin a phrase, "***Sigh***".
P.S. Unfortunately I was unable to make it to the Community Conversation here in NYC last evening. I haven't checked the Times yet, but if I see anything, I'll let you all know.
Welcome back, W. Hope you enjoyed your vacation.
The REAL Crisis ...
Thursday, 09-Sep-1999 10:53:01
... is that college football and basketball are coming up, and I'm gonna be busier'n a one-legged wallpaper hanger ...
Stephen M. Poole
Note: if you cannot wait to see what other pearls of wisdom are in this thread at the new Bonkers site, here's the url -
Has Poole been busted back to OM (Ordinary Mortal) or did he just forget to sign off with his Certified Electronic Technician stuff?
-- NINE is (email@example.com), September 09, 1999.
I'm amazed. Don't the pollys see how foolish they look? The techs talk here in great detail about how 9/9 will be minor, if anything at all. We talk about how the number of programs that do any look-ahead processing is tiny, how virtually no embedded systems have a 99 problem. Yet, they never learn. They always come back with "See, nothing happened. You guys are nuts."
I just can't figure it out, but then again, I can't figure out much about the polly attitude.
I feel like Bill Murry in that movie where he lives the same day over and over. I'm glad this is the last "critical" date of 1999. I can't take much more of this cluelessness.
Tick... Tock... <:00=
-- Sysman (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 10, 1999.
Well it's all finally over.. the polly's have no more hair-brained "see this PROVES that Y2k wont be a problem" left.
I've been AFK for a while so I don't know if there were any polly's still stupid enough or uneducated enough to NOT know the difference between 09/09/99 and 01/01/00.
When I took my leave, in '93 of this Y2k thing, concerns over 09/09/99 or 04/01/99 or 12/31/98 etc just werent an issue. It wasnt until pollyannas came about with a desperate need to PROVE that the people who wrote the code, knew nothing about this, that all these other dates became an issue. They cling to the desperate hope that because computers see 09/09/99 as 09/09/99 and not 99999 .. this PROVES beyond a doubt that computers will see 01/01/00 as /01/01/2000. It's all over now, I'm glad I missed it if there were any pollys really stupid enough to use 09/09/99 as some sort of PROOF of anything.
My last hope for public awareness is gone. I actually believed, STUPID me that people might just start to get a clue.... July 1st 1999... when the 90% of companies who missed the 12/31/98 deadline also missed the 6/31/99 deadline...
Looking back...on the memories... of the year we spent... in total denial of reality.... If I'd only known how the world would fall... Oh who's to say... I might have changed it all...
But I'm glad... glad I didnt know .. the way it all would end... the way it all would go...... Our lives are better left to chance....
Whitney (people PAY me not to sing....)
-- Whitney (Y2KWhit@aol.com), October 06, 1999.
(anybody know if the
key on the keyboard can wear out? And how long it takes?)
-- Hoffmeister (email@example.com), October 06, 1999.
I've got a few spare keyboards if you need one. Anybody that gets Hoff going is OK in my book! <:)=
PS - If it's you that needs the keyboard Hoff, that'll be $500.00, on sale this week only...
-- Sysman (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 06, 1999.
> I've got a few spare keyboards if you need one. Anybody that > gets Hoff going is OK in my book! <:)=
> PS - If it's you that needs the keyboard Hoff, that'll be > > $500.00, on sale this week only...
>-- Sysman (email@example.com), October 06, 1999.
Well thanks Sysman but my keyboard is fine only key that seems wore out on this new keyboard is the ........... <-- key...
I'm the bane of exsistance for anal-renetive wanna-be-english professors like Hoff.. :) I spent the summer doing doing that thang called "real-life" but winter is upon us... and we in the pacific north west have been warned to prepare for the worst winter in decades... so Hoff's right I'm BACKKKKKKKK :)
For those who love-to-hate-me and my ...'s all I can say is .. you should kiss the ground Ed walks on for making this medium for his forum... due to it's difficulty to navigate and post in.. I will never be the most prolific poster here.
Hoff... this one's for you...
o/~ Let me be there in your morning ... Let me be there in your night... Let me spell everything wrong.... to make you uptight....
Let me take you to that insanity land That only two can share..... All I ask you...oooooo...oooo....uuuu.... Is lenme drive you there....
-- Whitney (Y2KWhit@aol.com), October 06, 1999.