So far, I have been programmed to accept that on Jan.1, 2000 or sometime thereabout, I will know whether I can carry on with my lifestyle or if the end of the world is at hand.

Unfortunately, lately I have been made sorely aware that this is not the case at all.

According to Gartner and now several others including Mr. May with IEEE. I am to expect failures up to the point and beyond the point.

So why is the countdown continuing on this forum?? If hershey and child support and the documented Problems in other places are occurring and supposedly these events will purportedly increase-possibly exponentially-- into the new year and then beyond,

Should We not change the format of the COUNTDOWN to something more realistic? What may be taking place is a deterioration that we are currently witnessing the beginnings of. (like an undetected cancer)

Today Hershey tomorrow some other company next week and then the next and then ,well before you know it- it's Christmas and......... We are all sorely aware that we have a mess on our hands.

Like those people waiting for Paychecks or Child support or the Poor executives in Hershey, Pa.

The only reason I bring this up is because I continue to see posts that state---"58 more days" 1440 more Hours". This after reading an essay by Mr. May from IEEE that profoundly refutes that notion.

-- D.B. (dciinc@aol.com), November 01, 1999

Answers

Gawd!!!

OK, try to comprehend: Two prostitutes were chatting about the latest convention at the hotel. One sez to the other: "You know, working one of these Johns is like a snowstorm, you never know how many inches you are going to get or how long it is going to last."

There are PLENTY of systems and applications that can't handle the year 2000. Some may fail INSTANTLY. Some may just do funny things that take a while to discover. NOBODY KNOWS.

The most dire predictions for Y2K worst case scenarios usually assume that there will be a humongous amount of severe problems in a very short amount of time. (Like Infomagic's web thingy.) If indeed things can get stretched out somewhat, that may actually be GOOD NEWS sort of, since there is more time to deal with the problems. (The web stays up because the strands don't snap all at once.)

JANUARY 1 is the first day of the year 2000, which many systems are going to have heartburn with. I would say that it is QUITE important to keep mindful of. Like every day, if not every frigging hour!!!

And, FYI, we now have ... homina, homina ... SIXTY (60) DAYS TO GO!!!

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

You mean to tell me that after two years of reading pollys and doomers going after each other that you are not in the least curious about which is right ? The countdown is the dramatic build up to determine if the doomers are in fact just fanatical extremists or if they are intelligent and well informed. It may also determine whether the pollys are ignorant liberals or if they are intelligent and well informed. Since Y2K has some how become a political issue, we may be witnessing a sea change in America, being right is more important than the issue at hand. Dang it D.B. get with the fun !

-- Poker Youbetcha (Chips@arein.net), November 01, 1999.

When wil the real problems surface. 2006?

-- Kylie MonologuE Fan (doin@the.locomotion), November 01, 1999.

FWIW, when the eye of a hurricane passes you, the storm is not over, the winds simply change direction. (I realize that the analogy has many shortcomings.)

On the one hand, "embedded system" Y2K problems, or more generally, process control problems, however many and however severe they may, or may not, be, may be expected to peak within hours of rollover. If any of them do cause catastrophic problems, their effects may continue, and may be quite severe, for a considerable period.

On the other hand, "application program" Y2K problems may be expected to peak after rollover, and that peak may be expected to be climbing for weeks, perhaps months, after rollover.

Since we cannot know in advance which problems will be more severe, D.B.'s point may be quite appropriate.

Jerry

-- Jerry B (skeptic76@erols.com), November 01, 1999.

8,656 minutes or if you prefer 519,360 seconds PST.

-- tc (trashcan-man@webtv.net), November 01, 1999.

It's gotta "start" sometime, doesn't it? All this "early failure" stuff is just warming up. The main event (CURRENT-DATE) starts to 60 days. That's when the "world database" will start to get hit with year 2000 dates, BIG TIME, unlike the few examples that we have now. Oh, it will last for a while, no doubt. I expect Y2K related problems, and fixes, to show up for at least a year. The initial shock, how much, and how bad, is the real problem.

They call it the year 2000 problem for a fery good reason (where have I heard that before...)

Can I still use...

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

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), November 02, 1999.

PS - I've got to start looking at my posts before I hit send! That should be "IN 60 days" and "a VERY good reason". I'ld say more coffee, but it's 12:15 AM... <)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), November 02, 1999.

True, a lot of systems will not fail until monday, friday, or even the end of the month after rollover. Others may have r/t clocks that are not current, and which may fail a couple of hours before the rollover or some hours or days after. Still other systems will be corrupting data...and will continue for (potentially) months.

On the other hand, other systems will be failing at UTC midnight...or other, less standard, times.

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), November 02, 1999.

I think it'd be cool to have a female voice annoucing to the forum (like in the movie Alien), "It is to late for remedial action. This civilization will self-destruct in __days and __hours. You have approximately __days to prepare and reach a minimum safe distance before TEOWAWKI."

-- Ocotillo (peeling@out.===), November 02, 1999.

I would like to know if us on the West coast will ba ablle to see New York City go down when the ball falls in time square?

-- Larry Lamb (gfmd@tgi.net), November 02, 1999.

The emerging consensus that problems will spread out over time is undoubtedly good news. If it is true, then it is just as likely that problems will be spread out over space - in other words not all problems will occur in the same place at the same time. Not all industry sectors or organisations within a sector will be hit at the equally hard in the same short time fram. This will allow some room for readjustment - consumer led (less spending) or supplier led (the market). This prognosis provides the opportunity to contain the problem (e.g. to certain banks, countries, plant etc.) and aid recovery or the re-establishment of, if not normal, then at least for a time a 'degraded' level of service in certain sectors.

Of course one could argue that the gradual degradation that might occur could spiral downwards - I tend to think it could, perhaps to a recession on 73-74 scale, but no further. My thoughts lately have been that this prognosis is exactly what TPTB have been banking on - containable localised disruption but unpredictable in time and place (hence the need for just-in-case contingency planning). Pretty much the El Ninjo scenario. The three-day to two-week storm analogy, though much ridiculed in the past, might not be too far off the mark. If we do go into deep recession, Y2K will be characterised as just on amongst many factors that lead us down that path. The point is that it will also be politically manageable as well as technically. But I concede that at this stage of the game it is too late for any other options (i.e. mass preparation warnings for the general population).

So I'm more optimistic about how this thing will play out on the human scale. My worst case scenario no longer seems like a threat to my physical well being unless I am unlucky to be in the wrong place at the wrong time - a level of risk I can deal with psychologically, no worse than the feelings I get when taking a flight. But I'm holding on to my preps because I'm still not sure how the human side of the equation could play out in the weeks days leading up to rollover, or in reaction to failures when they do occur in the New Year. I still can't get a handle on how it will be dealt with by the media and how people will react to the unknown (before the event) and failures that do manifestly occur in the New Year.

-- Thinking from the hip (some_thoughts@thought.com), November 02, 1999.

Everyone deals with the Y2K impact of the millenium change in their own way--macabre humor, silliness, obsessing over details, asking questions designed to provoke one faction or another. Lighten up, bro. We are all just muddling through. Some of us are even wrestling in the muddling :) This forum is a little bit like a virtual family. Hanging together is preferable to hanging separately.

On the positive side, some of the people who post here have a lot of expertise on finances, petroleum, preparedness, practical tips, granular information on embedded systems, etc. We can all learn from one another and share anxiety.

This is a big deal however it turns out. We are always going to remember the tenor of the times--sorta like where we were when JFK was assassinated (for those of us old enough to remember).

-- Nancy (wellsnl@hotmail.com), November 02, 1999.

Larry asks:

I would like to know if us on the West coast will ba ablle to see New York City go down when the ball falls in time square?

- - - -

Probably not-- supposedly the grid is on UTC which will rollover at 6 pm CST... or 4 pm Pacific...

See http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/zones.html for "Standard Time Zone Conversions"

-- (wedon'tgotuntil@mid.nite), November 02, 1999.