If there is anyone in the media out there reading this that is responsible for these phony reports claiming that the 9999 bug is related to the 2000 bug ....

KNOCK IT OFF!!!

Ignoring Y2K because you passed the 9999 test is like saying you don't need to change the oil in your car because the radiator doesn't leak. Get a clue!

-- @ (@@@.@), September 09, 1999

Answers

The scary part of it, @, is that they might know *exactly* what they are doing! If you read the AP and Reuters articles about this, they are very carefully worded to leave one with the impression that these things are related, without actually saying it. Same thing with the "grid test" articles. From there, I think it "trickles down" to smaller outfits that don't understand this stuff as well, who then make the real mistakes in how they say things.

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), September 09, 1999.

The longer everyone sleeps, the more time we have to prepare. You can't do anything about the coverup so let's make good use of the time left.

-- cody (cody@y2ksurvive.com), September 09, 1999.

pshannon, You are so exactly right on. I thought it rather odd watching the news when I saw the Energy Secretary and head of Bonneville Power holding up the "9/9/99" sign:



Just in case their words regarding Y2K tend to get a little "mixed up" they held this stupid sign up as evidence. When power utilities start crashing people are going to want to sue because they were told everything was fixed. But these jokers are going to show them this photo and say ... "Look, we were only talking about the 9/9/99". Pretty sneaky.

-- @ (@@@.@), September 09, 1999.

Great picture! It would have been perfect if they had just waited 6 more seconds to snap the shutter...

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), September 09, 1999.

I'm here. 99.99 + .01 %

Tick... Tock... <:00=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), September 09, 1999.

It is now 10:35 PM. Ten minutes ago I was listening to the local news on Fox Channel 5, a Washington DC station. I believe I'm quoting the anchorman exactly: "Today was a big test of Y2K readiness....Only an hour and a half to go and we seem to have come out of this alright.... Some computer programmers wondered if life as we know it would cease on nine-nine-ninetynine" (This last words were spoken as a picture of an a-bomb explosion was shown on the screen)

-- Peter Errington (petere@ricochet.net), September 09, 1999.

"Some computer programmers wondered if life as we know it would cease on nine-nine-ninetynine"

I wonder where their forum is... <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), September 09, 1999.

I'm surprised they didn't get Vanna White, balloons, and confetti in that picture too. Really, if you're gonna make a show at least do it right!

-- Gia (laureltree7@hotmail.com), September 10, 1999.

One of the local TV stations interviewed a Tech from a local ISP. The tech stated that any company that survived 9/9/99 is in good shape to make it through Y2K. MORON!

For the record, the ISP this idiot works for is Socket Internet Services, Columbia Missouri, Socket.Net

-- Ryker (ryker@enterprise.net), September 10, 1999.

Sorry, forgot the www in above link.

ryker@enterprise.net), September 10, 1999.

GRRR... One more time.....

http://www.socket.net

-- Ryker (ryker@enterprise.net), September 10, 1999.

@@@@@@@ meant to include all you doomers that posted in the past about how sept 9 was going to cause problems. He just forgot to put that in his post.

I'm happy to remind you. go read the archives. have fun. I did.

Do you need gravy for that crow?

-- Where (are@ll.theproblems?), September 10, 1999.

Where,

There is very little information available about how many programs that actually contain the 9999 shutdown code are still running, and after yesterday it would appear to be very few. But the fact remains that computers do follow instructions and there might just as likely have been multiple shutdowns yesterday as some posters had thought.

The overwhelming majority of posters on this forum are knowledgeable enough to know that the execution of the 9999 instructions is an entirely different scenario than what will occur if a computer is not capable of reading 4 digit dates. They may have thought this could serve of an example of how undesirable coding can remain uncorrected, but as it turns out there wasn't much there to be corrected.

The issue I was referring to in my initial post which your pea-sized brain does not seem capable of discerning, is that a vast majority of our wonderful media is proudly proclaiming that this means we no longer have to be concerned about the Y2K problem. Since they have described the actual mechanics of the date digit deficit thousands of times in their own articles, and still do to this day, I must conclude the following:

A. They don't read the words they put in their own news reports, or

B. They are simply too stupid to understand this concept, which means they are even more ignorant than we think they are, or

C. Motivated primarily by economic and political concerns, they are intentionally trying to deceive the public to protect their own interests.

My guess is that it is a combination of all three of these reasons, but mostly because of the third.

THAT is what my original post was about. I can't spell it out in much simpler terms than this, so I hope you will finally get it through your thick head - MORON!

-- @ (@@@.@), September 10, 1999.

Where,

You must be on the wrong forum. The last time that I checked, we have at least 875 man-years or programming experience here, and virtually everyone has said thet 9/9 would be very minor. Sorry, you're just plain wrong.

Tick... Tock... <:00=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), September 10, 1999.

OK boyeeeeeeeezzzzzz, I'll try and explain. I don't think it will work but I'll still try.

LOC had to be searched for possible 9999 EOF, right? How many LOC? *all* of them?

LOC had to be searched for 2-digit dating.

OK lets see. They can search for FYLA dates, find and fix them (done and over with) They can search for and find possible EOF coding and fix it (granted there probably wasn't much to find in the first place)

Are you saying that they CANNOT search for and find 2-digit dependant LOC?

USE YOUR OWN LOGIC. IF THEY CAN FIX THESE DATE PROBLEMS, ****WHY**** CAN'T THEY FIX Y2K DATE PROBLEMS?

(sysman are you REALLY going to make me copy and paste all the 9999 predictions made on this board in the last two years? I bumped several to the top of new answers this morning[[DOUBLE NOTE: It does look to me like YOU said all along that sept 9 wouldn't amount to anything. Good for you. **MANY** of your fellow doomists are NOT so fortunate]]

Also, the predictions for 99 dates were very.......nasty.....in the earlier archives. People shouting "this proves the pollys wrong" and that kind of garbage.

Only AFTER several "trigger" dates came and went, did the predicting get much more subtle.

Is it really fair for the extremist morons to be able to tell OTHER HUMAN BEINGS that they will die horribly, or burn in hell, or that sort of thing, and NOT expect those flamed to retaliate?

What will you say when Jan is a non-event?

-- Where (are@ll.theproblems & your brains?), September 10, 1999.

Where,

Watch out, or they will be cooking your Y2K-starved flesh over an open pit next... :)

Amused Regards,
Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), September 10, 1999.

Where,

No, I don't want you to cut and paste all that crap. Just the ones from the programmers. You know, the people that work on this stuff.

Andy Ray,

Get lost.

Tick... Tock... <:00=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), September 10, 1999.

Do you mean programmers like Cory Dranktomuchi?

Andy Ray,

Yeah I'll bet they can't wait to eat the dead carcasses of the "polly" crowd. Sooooooooooo sorry to disapoint.

-- Where (are@ll.theproblems?), September 11, 1999.

Be sure and read "CNN reports a day too soon on y2k test" thread.

@@@.@, they indeed do have a clue. The spinning kind.

-- Chris (#$%^&@pond.com), September 11, 1999.