http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001RaS

Lets just say that most of the predictions on this forum are wrong. That Y2K comes and goes without much of anything happening to the general populace. That Water, Phones are all OK. Maybe a small company or store here and there that didnt do anything goes out of business but in general nothing much happens that isnt more then an annoyance or aggravation for the vast majority. There may be a recession but itll be due to the natural end of the Bull Market, not Y2K induced.

How long will it take for the "usual suspects" that post for the light bulb to go on and say they were wrong? Will you wait until the middle of January (accumulated effects?), February 29th, March 1st, June, December 31st, 2001? 2010, 2015?

Note Im not asking for comments or a debate on if its a good idea to prepare or what you will do will all of your food and ammo afterwards. Im asking if there is a time period after 1/1/2000 when youll come to the realization that your basic assumptions were wrong if things dont go as predicted.

(And I cant help but wonder if you will blame it on Government or Companies for "misleading" you or will you blame it on the Y2K gurus?)

-- The Engineer (The Engineer@tech.com), September 21, 1999

* * * 19990921 Tuesday

This is Polly-Troll baiting tripe post--I know!... I'll be brief, anyway...

"The Engineer":

There'll be no escaping "misleading" Y2K statements from corporate- statists. In a U.S. stock market decline, there will never be reasons for any companies/municipalities in telecommunications, electrical power, water treatment, or financial industries to lose"confidence" of investors. I base this conclusion on the current U.S. standard of living (i.e., customary telecomm, electric, financial, etc. in the present economy ). Even during the Great Depression there was demand for all infrastructure services!

However, if the any corner of the "Iron Triangle" infrastructure "breaks"--becomes non-functional--it will be self-evident where the shame belongs. A stock market collapse does not cause any segment of the infrastructure to become unable to deliver the "goods."

IMHO, the answer to your lame, baited question is:

October 1999 will be _the_ critical month! When small businesses see applications unable to project beyond 3 months ( into 2000 ), the failures will generate "awareness," propelling societies into the realm of unavoidable and irreversible public "Y2K Panic." [Emphasis added]

Basic Y2K assumptions are not incorrect!

* The code is broken and cannot be fixed before Y2K.

* There is sufficient Y2K PR spun denial to keep the sheep asleep.

* There are countless examples of failed/failing systems.

There will be no doubt that more systems failures will be observed and noted in horror by employees in the bowels of corporate-statist enterprises--GLOBALLY.

The only unknown will be the trajectory societies will choose to deal with and remedy the situation. All options will be open! Rebuilding upon, and/or preserving, vestiges of a proven failed socio-technology infrastructure should not be an option.

Regards, Bob Mangus

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus1@yahoo.com), September 21, 1999.

-- Robin S. Messing (rsm7@cornell.edu), November 01, 1999

Answers

Robin Messing, once again, you have shown why some people don't get it, and that is because they focus on one event, rather than the interdependancy of systems. It seems Mr. Mangus was mistaken about human behavior, and that's easy to do. Anyone who really knows (like yourself?) what will happen, should contact our government and explain that preps won't be neccesary.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), November 01, 1999.

I would think that it is reasonable to wait until the end of the first fiscal quarter of 2000 to assess what the impact of Y2K is. This is not to say that there might not be some "gotchas" coming later, but if we get through the end of March 2000 relatively unscathed, I would think that it would be reasonable to assume that whatever problems might occur after that would be equally managable.

So you see, Robin, all that you had to do was just ask. You didn't have to take a perfectly good question that you had and bury it into somebody's off-the-wall wild ass speculation, replete with an inflammatory and misleading thread title.

But, of course, that's what polly trolls like to do, right?

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), November 01, 1999.

If the oil markets don't have trouble my mid-March; I'm back in the stock market.

-- DGBennett (bennett1@peachnet.net), November 01, 1999.

Wow, another freakin genius from Cornell, who has so many original thoughts in her head that she has to steal words from other posters, I'm impressed. Yeah, they'll sell you a real slick-lookin degree at Cornell, but it's too bad you can't buy brains!!

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), November 01, 1999.

Robin,

Thanks for that post. I have often wondereed when those who think the world was going to end will eventually realize that it hasn't.

I agree that we should have some preps but people like Andy and Hawk who hope the whole thing comes crashing down are sick, sick, sick.

Once again, Hawk, you blast the poster instead of providing some legitimate arguments. Clean up your act. You have a disgusting mouth.

-- (AndyHawk@weAreMorons.com), November 01, 1999.

y2k is Not a one-day event. this is probably the single biggest misconeption of all y2k 'myths'. it will be ongoing for many many years.

but to answer your question, i would say that if there are no obvious catastrophies by july of 2000, we *may* be out of the woods. unfortunately, larger IT failures can take 6 mo (or longer) before the public finally becomes aware of it.

as an aside here, i have to say that there's nothing better that i'd like than to be wrong about what i think will be happening. keep my job, my current lifestyle of living. yeah, i'll take that any day. but somehow i just don't feel thats in the cards for us.

as put so succintly recently ... "i'm prepared to be wrong. are you?"

-- lou (lanny1@ix.netcom.com), November 01, 1999.

I will insist that Y2K is a 10 until December 31, 2000. If at that point there are no problems, I will seek after the next gloomy doomy story to feed on. I must have my dose of gloom everyday because I am a doomsayer.

I will not have spent my life savings on Y2K to have it go to waste.

The sky IS falling. Someway, somehow.

-- Iza Doomer (HaveDoomAttitude@WillFindGloom.com), November 01, 1999.

What's that sound? Is it the whoosh of back-pedaling I hear from the Tinfoils? How long ago was it that these same dunderheads were predicting "hundreds of millions dead" and "lights off on January first".

Robin, the one thing I am sure of is that die hard death lovers will be waiting to the last possible moment to admit their precious end og the world isn't coming.

Here are some "other" progostications that turned out to be less than accurate... "On January 1, 1999 they will experience many more, and it will be much more difficult to sweep them under the rug. On April 1, 1999 we will all watch anxiously as the governments of Japan and Canada, as well as the state of New York, begin their 1999-2000 fiscal year; at that moment, the speculation about Y2K will end, and we will have tangible evidence of whether governmental computer systems work or not."-- Ed Yourdon

"... I believe we'll start seeing [disruptions] by this summer, and I believe they'll continue for at least a year. As many people are now aware, 46 states (along with Australia and New Zealand) will begin their 1999-2000 fiscal year on July 1, 1999; New York (and Canada) will already have gone through their Y2K fiscal rollover on April 1, and the remaining three states begin their new fiscal year on August 1, September 1, and October 1. We also have the GPS rollover problem to look forward to on August 22nd, as well as the Federal government's new fiscal year on October 1st.

There is, of course, some finite probability that all of these rollover events will occur without any problems; but there's also a finite probability that pigs will learn to fly."

Ed "Flying Pig" Yourdon

April 1, 1999. On this date, Canada, Japan, and the State of New York begin their fiscal year. This will, of course, include dates beyond Y2K. As a result, planning systems, especially budgets that have not been repaired will fail as they attempt to process Y2K dates. Since New York City is the media capitol of the world, problems there will grab headlines worldwide. Problems in Japan will remind everyone again of how interconnected our world is. The Japanese will also be forced to admit that there systems might not make it. I expect the stock market to react and begin (or continue) its downward spiral. Public confidence will continue to wane and the number of Y2K optimists will continue to dwindle.

July 1, 1999. On this date, forty-four U.S. states begin their fiscal years. The problems that began in New York will now spread exponentially across the country and around the world. The public will feel the global and pervasive nature of the Y2K Problem for the first time. This will be further exacerbated by the fact that many states have not had the resources to adequately address their Millennium Bug problems. Consequently, the failures will be real and widespread.

From the 12 Oct 1998 issue of Westergaard - Michael Hyatt 1. "Months before January 1, 2000, the world's stock markets will have crashed."

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/index.cfm (Paragraph 6)

2. "The exodus of programmers will begin no later than 1999."

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/index.cfm (Paragraph 5)

3. "The GPS rollover (to Jan. 6, 1980) on August 22, 1999, may create big problems for banks and bank wire transfers... My view: the banking system will be gone before y2k arrives."

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/2818

4. "The Euro conversion is doomed. The deadline for stage one is January 1, 1999, and nobody has made it."

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/3048

5. "Month by month, my former critics are moving my way. I'll be mainstream in a year."

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/1880 - 6-24-98

6. "In January, 1999, the Jo Anne effect will begin to take its toll. That's when corporate fiscal years start rolling into 2000."

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/2434 8-29-98

7. "If the Jo Anne effect begins to create panic in the corridors of the corporate world, think of April 1, 1999, when the three major trading partners of the United States roll into fiscal 2000: Canada, Japan, and New York State."

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/2434 8-29-98

8. Some major computer problems will begin in early 1999, growing worse in the fall of 1999. This gives us even less time to prepare.

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/1385

"I think that there will be untold millions dead in the US alone."

Paul Milne (fedinfo@halifax.com), July 15, 1999

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), November 01, 1999.

61.75 days and we will start to know for sure, won't we? Though we won't know for SURE until at LEAST Q2 or Q3. Chuck

Because it's a 2000 problem.

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), November 01, 1999.

There's an implicit assumption in the Engineer's original question here. Engineer appears to take for granted that those whose expectations are proven wrong by later events will be looking for someone else to blame for their disappointment.

IMO the question betrays the Engineer's own response pattern.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), November 01, 1999.

Translation:

We know that EVERY single prognostication a fellow Tinfoil has made thus far has turned out to be WRONG.

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), November 01, 1999.

It's Robin's turn to pull our chains this week so be nice to him, he's got a hard job to do. Besides, he has an interesting grasp of international affairs and is an expert on "Afghanastan" (sic).

http://stand77.com/wwwboard/messages/2911.html

But seriously, I thought the Doomers were telling us how far Russia and China were in their y2k repairs. I thought that they were basketcases and that their military was going to be too busy just keeping their own poplulations under control when TSHTF. Sorry Doomers! You can't have it both ways. y2k can not simultaneously make Russia fall flat on its face and turn it into a 10 foot giant.

Besides, doesn't Russia have its hands full with Chechnya? And do you think they want to pick a fight with us if they can't even take over a Rinky-Dink nation like Afghanastan?

-- Where's the (taliban@when.Uneedem?), November 01, 1999.

Robin, If, on the chance, that we are correct however and there are major problems, will you be the first to stand up and say "I blew it" to your family or will you be going door to door for help? I have been caught in the cold with no coat, it's not fun. While I don't expect millions dead, I do forsee problems that could affect our way of life for awhile. It is better to be self sufficient then to be dependant. Where wil you stand. I would be willing to bet that you have some itmes prepared just in case.

-- greg (skipy@erols.com), November 01, 1999.

C'mon, Chuck. The Y2K crystal ball gazers should be responsible for predictions--correct or not. If the any of the predictions were correct, the Y2K pessimists would trumpet loudly. Accurate predictions are a reasonable basis for credibility. Inaccurate predictions work the same way. Gary North has been wrong for two decades. Ed Yourdon has "blown" the '99 critical dates... and so have many others. This diminishes their credibility as prognosticators.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), November 01, 1999.

We should know if y2k is going to be a major problem when the majority of companies have released their first quarter reports. If they are having problems, they will have to make the fact public at that time, or face lawsuits by shareholders. Also, the price trend of petroleum products during the first quarter will provide an important clue. If supply problems develop, we will see rising prices during the first quarter. If no major problems are evident by May 1, I will concede tht y2k is no big deal.

-- Danny (dcox@ix.netcom.com), November 01, 1999.

I'm reminded of the joke about the guy who jumps off a 50 story building.

As he passses the 20th floor, he says to himself, "So far so good."

So.... We just haven't hit the ground yet.

-- everything is (just@fine.spllllaaat), November 01, 1999.

Can Robin, Decker or Pro explain why the Chairman of the IEEE is a doomer?

I thought not.

-- a (a@a.a), November 01, 1999.

*Sigh*

Robin, et. al., try reading...

IEEE Y2K Chairman's Personal, Pessimistic Take on Y2K and Yourdon's End Game Paper

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001fqh

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 01, 1999.

I am starting to believe that polly's have never heard or perhaps are incapable of understanding the concept or "risk management".

From the best data available to me I can only conclude one of two things.

1. That there is some degree of risk from diruptions due to Y2K related failures.

2. That there is NO risk associated with Y2K and it has all been a huge conspiricy involving not only the governments (local, state, federal and worldwide) of the entire world, all major corporations, and millions of medium and small businesses.

It's either one or the other.

So which is it, a potential risk or a worldwide conspiricy?

As an old Eagle Scout I have used the pricible of "be prepared" all of my life. It works.

I think the stock market is headed for a major downturn, but I still have some of my investments in equities, there is still money to be made if you are careful. And I like gambling. I have gold (and have for decades) because it is a good thing to have in a balanced portfollio and has much more visual appeal than paper money.

I have emergency supplies (I lived in hurricaine prone Florida for 12 years and have always thought it was a good idea). I have more now because I percieve a possible threat. It's MY call not yours. If I'm wrong it won't be the first time and it won't ruin me.

If there was a one in a thousand chance that I would need something that would save my or my families lives then I would be more confortable having it on hand than taking a chance. I think from the data available to me that the odds of serious problems from Y2K are much greater that a thousand to one.

How many of you Polly's who are fully invested in equities are living in a rental property and maxed out on credit to by your equities? Most of the ones I know can't pay their bills buy have lots of Microsoft, they get very nervous when their tulip bulbs, uh I mean stocks drop at all.

Life is rarely all or nothing. There are many shades of gray and anyone who does not hedge their bets will eventually live (if they are lucky) to regret it.

-- John Beck (eurisko111@aol.com), November 01, 1999.

Decker is right,

I think it would go a long way to prove your credibility to renounce the likes of Yourdon, Hyatt, Hamasaki, Milne, North, etc. They were obviously very far off about Y2K and 1999, which means they could not have been that well educated about what they meant to sound smart about.

"Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me."

-- (another@optimist.com), November 01, 1999.

If we're still talking about the statement by Bob Mangus, then I thought I'd point out something relevant that Sysman said recently...

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001e4I

Can you show me a "billing" system, that does a payment due date more than 30 days out? Better yet, show me one that does more than 25 days, allowing for processing time before the next close.

Will billing be first generally noticeable Y2K problem?

Accounting software problems tied to fiscal years (the Jo Anne Effect) and financial forecasting problems are not the kind of problems that would be obvious to those outside of a particular organization. Billing problems, though, are something that goes beyond the walls of a particular organization.

Also see this thread about fiscal year rollovers in accounting software (the Jo Anne Effect):

"Significance of States Fiscal Start"

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00122f

At or near the rollover, there's the potential for added problems with PC BIOS chip and PC operating systems, and embedded system/process control systems. That's when Y2K could affect manufacturing, production or utilities.

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), November 01, 1999.

If I were a pollie instead of a foaming at the mouth doomer,I'd be feeling pretty good right now since my life was at stake in my being right.

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), November 01, 1999.

To Ken Decker, Et. Al.,

For you to concentrate on the fact that Yourdon, North, etc. have been incorrect on perhaps many things and for you to conclude that since they promote certain ideas about y2k that those views on y2k are lies, is to ignore all other evidence to the contrary. But I understand; that 's a psychological defense mechanism on your part. To consider the alternative is too horrific for you to contemplate.

-- eve (123@4567.com), November 01, 1999.

I vote for March 2000.

By then we should know whose predictions were the most accurate.

-- Dana (A_Non_O_Moose@xxx.com), November 01, 1999.

>> October 1999 will be _the_ critical month! When small businesses see applications unable to project beyond 3 months (into 2000 ), the failures will generate "awareness," propelling societies into the realm of unavoidable and irreversible public "Y2K Panic." <<

Robin, you seem a bit overeager to post this on the morning of November 1 as a "failed prediction". Calm down a bit.

I happen to disagree with this prediction and I believe it *will* fail, but, in the tradition of Delphic oracles, Bob Mangus has uttered a very ambiguously-worded prediction. Read more carefully:

He simply identifies October as the "critical month". Then he predicts a cause (failed look-ahead calculations) that will be followed by a primary effect (awareness) leading eventually to a secondary effect (panic).

Grammatically, all you can derive from his prediction is that the awareness will happen *in* October and the panic will *follow* in due time.

Now, the reason I disagree with this prediction is simple. The cause is not sufficient to produce a panic.

I strongly suspect there are a lot of intermediate steps that Bob Mangus left out of his argument, such as the "awareness" he cited leading to an acceleration of preparation, leading to strains on the JIT system, leading to creeping awareness, leading to further strains, until a critical mass of events accumulate and cause a panic. If my strong suspicions are correct, then probably Bob never intended to predict that the whole process would be complete within October, only that the decisive trigger event (in his view) would take place.

There is still time for him to be right, Robin. But don't despair. The probabilities are still with you. Hang in there. You may yet get a chance to flap your wings and crow in this barnyard.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), November 01, 1999.

interesting

"61.75 days and we will start to know for sure, won't we? Though we won't know for SURE until at LEAST Q2 or Q3. Chuck

Because it's a 2000 problem.

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), November 01, 1999.

why won't we know until 2 or 3rd Q? If y2k is really an event that requires months (or more) of preparations, wouldn't the cause of needing those preps be very evident on Jan 1?

IOW, if no trouble will show up until 2 or 3rd Q, why do you need ****14 days of preps***** in January? Isn't the argument for pessimistic outcome something like "yes, we experience computer problems every day NOW, but not EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE."

Isn't Jan 1 the date that is the problem? You know, going from 99 to 00? remember that? WHAT will cause delays in evidencing major problems? If it doesn't happen all at once in January, won't that mean it is just another day at the office for those who work IT/IS for a living?

Remember, computers fail every day NOW. 99.999% of these failures are never heard of, and get worked around. Again, If a mass of problems hit SIMULTANEOUSLY the first week of January, resources to fix the problems might be stretched too thin. But if the problems are spread out over months, or even years....I don't see how that is any different than what happens right now, day to day month to month and year to year in the computer industry.

I wish that a moderate pessimist could explain the reasoning behind that way of thinking. It doesn't add up in my book.

Does that make me a clueless pollyanna? [grin]

-- James Tilamook (address@correction.requested), November 01, 1999.

IF things go according to government spin and "nothing" happens but "isolated problems" then I would suppose that one could conclude that one was mistaken in the AMOUNT of prepping that one did (provided one is not part of an "isolated problem"). (Not in prepping itself as one should always be prepared to some degree for natural disaster).

However, I cannot, for the life of me, figure out why you Pollies seem to think that we who are more prepared must blame somebody for our "mistake" of preparing too much. We are all grown-ups here (well, most of us anyway), we have read all the information that we have deemed necessary for our own peace of mind, and made our decisions based on what we perceive as the most likely scenerio. So why do you think we will have to blame anyone? Most of us have prepared with things we use anyway for the most part. Very little of what we have prepared with will go to waste (might dump some of the water out), might take a while to use up the lamp oil, but blame someone?? Why ferevan's sake? I think most of us will say/think - "Well, thank God!" and get on with our lives, albeit with a better understanding of ourselves and hopefully, the world around us.

-- Valkyrie (anon@please.xnet), November 01, 1999.

Personally, I believe that the disruption types we will see in 1999, we are already seeing. That is the buggy, problematic systems being implemented that are rolled out too fast.

We saw it with the Air Traffic Control systems. Rolled out...failed....went to backup (the NON-Y2K ready systems.

We saw it and continue to see it with Hershey's. New systems to be ready for Y2K...didn't work...now a huge impact on earnings and ability to deliver product.

The World Bank as they put in SAP.....couldn't pay their contractors for months.

That scheeol system that had payroll problems with the new system.

The fact is too many companies are racing to the wire with new systems that won't be fully ready in time. For now they can fall back on legacy systems to meet the needs. In January, they won't be able to.

For now, the polly's tell you that these problems are not definitionally Y2K failures, but let's call them what they are y2k- related.

I posted my personal experience with two companies that are reacing to the finish line. They took y2k seriously, and theought they would be fine. Both thought they would be in steady state by 7/99. Neither are as of today.

We know they won't get all the testing they wanted. Don't believe everything is hunky dory in corporate america.

Look at it another way. All this work is to get mission critical systems ready. What about all the others? Those systems are there to enhance productivity and profits. When all those systems fail, you can't convince me it won't send shivers through the eceonomy. Shivers? More like the DT's.

Maybe we won't see it all on January 1, but I'm with a;lot of others when I say, I'll start to feel comfortable when the snow thaws!

-- Duke 1983 (Duke1983@AOL.com), November 01, 1999.

James,

Short- and long-term supply-chain problems in some sectors of the economy due to Y2K are likely. These wouldn't become obvious until the stocks in supply chains with problems have been drawn down. Also see these comments by John Koskinen:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001AdE

[snip]

Government's top Y2K expert predicts failures for weeks, months

July 30, 1999
Web posted at: 12:06 PM EDT (1606 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Don't expect the Year 2000 technology problem to disappear after Jan. 1. President Clinton's top Y2K expert said failures could extend well beyond New Year's Day.
 

Although John Koskinen predicts there will be 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 Thursday 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 Monday, 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. [snip]

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), November 01, 1999.

We need to wait until AT LEAST 1/1/10000 to see what happens when our four digit years turn to five digit years. Meanwhile, I'll be taking a nap.

Al K

-- Al K. Lloyd (all@ready.now), November 01, 1999.

* * * 19991101 Monday

Brain McLaughlin: Your characterization is fair. Thank you!

Look at these items below, appearing in cyber/print in the month of October alone, there are a lot of people suffering from Y2K-related failures already (e.g., unable to pay their monthly liabilities)!

OTOH, the "unaffected" folks in these hometowns (Philly, D.C.), have had fair Y2K warning, also.

If the following--COLLECTIVELY--on top of all the other KNOWN (ONGOING) FAILURES doesn't leave a stain in your pants and move folks to prudent preparations, the serious cull will commence after mid-January 2000!

* IRS - Plans to write refund checks MANUALLY(?!?); problems tracking (a.k.a. inventory) computer equipment and systems.

* Del Monte - Y2K-related sales attributed to increased profits.

* USA Schools - One-third NOT Y2K COMPLIANT.

* FDA - Thousands of medical devices _STILL_ NOT Y2K COMPLIANT.

* CIA - Serious CONCERNS about Y2K NUCLEAR ACCIDENTS.

* EPA - 66,000 HAZARD SITES vulnerable to Y2K incidents (ref www.epa.gov to search by Zip Code).

* Center for Y2K and Society - recommend "Safety Holidays"; Survey: 85.6% CHEMICAL PLANTS NOT READY - RECOMMEND PLANNED SHUTDOWN.

* JAPAN - Urging population to stockpile for "72 hours." (ONLY! {*SIGH*})

* Levi Strauss - Unless stockpiling across product line, it doesn't make sense _to_ stockpile. CAN'T ASSIGN (DETERMINE) RISK TO SUPPLIERS and/or COUNTRIES.

* CARGILL, INC. - (FOOD) Retailers must determine demand for supply -- THERE IS INSIGNIFICANT "DEMAND" -- WHY? : Polly spin (LIES) is successful!

* FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) [Jim Lord report] Issued DIRECTIVE that NO POWER GRID DECOUPLING PERMITTED as peremptive strategy to minimizing damage.

* CANADA BANKING DIRECTIVE: Be prepared to use money orders and checks "Lions and Tigers and Scams! Lions and Tigers and Scams!"

* AICPA (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, "CPA Bulletin"; October, 1999 issue to members - * "By mid-December, withdraw enough cash to cover your expenses for about a month (p. 3)..." * "Fill all prescriptions before 2000, and make sure you have a 60 day supply of needed prescription medications on hand by December 1 (p. 4)..."

* SOC (Self-Organized Criticality) - [Fractal; chaos theory] Mendelbrot (cotton prices) * Infrastructure is a fractal system (e.g., Richter, economics).

* Open Text, Inc. - "possible Y2K problems" affecting future prospects (a la Hershey problems)

* Moody's - To review and generate "possible" downgrade for Y2K "systems failures".

* Singapore - Mailed 950,000 home guides re Y2K preparations.

* D.C. teachers ( < 40 hrs. ) partial or no pay.

* Philly (PA) school district since summer 1999: Payments to dead made; no payments to 20,000 staff.

* DMV failures in multiple ( > 4 ) states.

* Hunting licenses manually issued.

... ad nauseum

Y2K _is_ rolling downhill ... Private and public held companies will be the last "discovered."

Regards, Bob Mangus

"Lay low..."

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus1@yahoo.com), November 01, 1999.

Sorry Doomers! You can't have it both ways. y2k can not simultaneously make Russia fall flat on its face and turn it into a 10 foot giant. ___________

Not that I'm predicting it to happen but.....

Social turmoil in Russia, civil war, rogue faction(s) takes control of a nuclear facility(ies), sees US/NATO as root of all problems in Russia....

Could definately happen, even without Y2K.

-- (eurisko111@aol.com), November 01, 1999.

Anyone who makes a lot of specific predictions about the future is going to make a lot of mistakes. When was the last time the majority of economists accurately predicted the start of a recession? How many stock market experts can accurately predict where the market will be in 3 months? Don't be too critical of Ed Yourdon. All of his many predictions are not going to be accurate, but everyone should hold off on thier judgement of him until next spring.

-- Danny (dcox@ix.netcom.com), November 01, 1999.

eve:

I think you have misunderstood the entire nature of Decker's observation. People like Yourdon, Infomagic and Hamasaki claim to be speaking from personal knowledge and great experience. They didn't pull their predictions out of a hat, they based those predictions on their familiarity with code they work with every day, and which in some cases they wrote themselves.

Nobody is calling their views lies. They sincerely expected problems, and presumably they are in a position to know such things. And as others on this thread (and other threads) have made very clear, there have been LOTS of problems. We read about new ones every day. Nobody is "ignoring" this evidence out of some sort of "defense mechanism."

The crux of the failed predictions isn't that problems did not occur as predicted. They did occur. The crux is that these problems have been absorbed with hardly a ripple. The vast majority were corrected without anyone outside the IT department being aware. A few have been so bad they've been news stories, and in some cases hundreds of people are being inconvenienced, some of them badly. And a few of *them* have persisted for some time.

Now, where are the dominoes? Can it be possible that those making predictions may have had an exaggerated picture of the importance of IT problems? Could they have underestimated the ease of repairing most of them? Could they have misassessed the role that software plays in our economy? Could it be possible that whatever reasons caused past predictions to fare poorly might ALSO cause current predictions to do likewise?

Our pessimists remind me of the old joke about economists. First, they tell us what will happen. Then they explain why it didn't!

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), November 01, 1999.

Want to know about some prognosticators who haven't had their credibility diminished this year? How 'bout the US Senate Y2K committee! "Severe long- and short-term disruptions to supply chains are likely" sounds pretty serious to me. Every doomer, polly, and in-between who has posted on this thread, including me, doesn't know doodley squat and doesn't have one billionth of the resources for evaluating the Y2K problem, relative to this committee. Are they right? I hope not. Is anyone who vehemently disagrees with them being arrogant? You be the judge.

-- Bill Byars (billbyars@softwaresmith.com), November 01, 1999.

I take exception to the phrase "basic assumption". I am not assuming anything.

Most predictions made ANYWHERE are wrong. No one knows what is going to happen January 1st.

What we do know is that without remediation completed to date, we would have been in very serious trouble. That's why corporations and governments have spent billions to try and fix it. (I certainly would not be arrogant enought to think that they all fell for some kind of hoax) Monies spent on remediation this year, have to be balanced at some point. Are stockholders going to eat it all? I doubt it.

My preps work two ways, they are here in the event of disruptions, and they are here to help with the rising cost of products in the event there are no disruptions.

Am I going to back pedal on my concerns that the lights may go out on January 1st? No. There may not be any trouble until something causes the lights to go out in a normal way (winter storms, etc.). I know I like to eat, I like to read, and I like to stay warm. I always have enough to get me through any minor inconveniences. Y2K has the potential to be more than a minor inconvenience, therefore, I prepare accordingly. Do I have enough? Who knows? You don't, and I don't.

Am I going to blame any of the so called Y2K gurus if it turns out to be a non-event? No. I do not recall any of them being along with me while I purchased my preps. Thus, no gun to my head, no arm- twisting, no undue influence.

To me the only difference in Y2K preps and all my other insurance, is y2k is a one time event during my lifetime.

I certainly have not spent on Y2K, what I have spent on life, auto, home and health insurance in the past 5 years. I guess I do not understand why some so called "pollies" get their knickers in a wad over this.

-- Dian (bdp@accessunited.com), November 02, 1999.

Nice job Dian, I agree with you 100% on that. If nothing else, these extra supplies I've bought in advance, which is really only about 6 months worth, are going to save me a lot of money when prices start shooting up. It's a good, solid investment in the future of something I know I will use, and might even prove to be a better investment than the stock market. I'm getting sick of all these antagonists interfering in our constructive discussions, we're not hurting anyone with our actions, just boosting the economy a bit. Take care.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), November 02, 1999.

Flint:

Your point about the predictions coming to pass and being absorbed is well taken.

But, since those were all IT issues, what does that have to do with embedded systems facing a real time crunch at 1/1/2000? Do you honestly think that the risk is not taken to a whole new level at that point?

In other words, I see no analogy here. In fact, none exists. That is why we prepare.

-- eve (123@4567.com), November 02, 1999.

To Ken Decker, Et. Al.:

With reference to a prior post of mine:

To the extent that you have truly endeavored to look at all the evidence without focusing on individuals' failed predictions, etc., and have tried to reach a rational conclusion, I apologize for my comment about your psychological motives.

-- eve (123@4567.com), November 02, 1999.