This sounds like an ignorant question, but stepping back and looking at the Y2K problem, well, its hard to get too stupid. The question is this. Frequently there are reassurances that embedded chips fail to a safe state, i.e. valve open if that is more safe or breaker closed if that is more safe etc. Is there good evidence that, the documented failures so far discovered in Y2K remediation did in fact fail in the safe mode. This mode of failure was, by definition, not accounted for in the non-compliant device. Further, for a device to go to fail-safe it must first "know" that it has failed. I don't present this as a "we're doomed throw up our arms" post nor at this date as thought for remediation, but only as re-emphasis that if we do encounter problems it may require knowledgable, experienced personell to rectify those problems and potentially avert unintended damage.

-- Anonymous, December 12, 1999

Answers

PD, hello. An excellent question! I hope you won't mind my copying your inquiry over to CNN's Year 2000 Bug forum. I will use only your initials, and the reference to this location. I try always to be careful NOT to include a person's email address, since I much value discretion. However, I might mention here that I was careless a couple days ago when I copied over Marianne's 12/09 "sign of the times" post. For which I apologize to you, Marianne. By the time I realized it, it was too late. I am sorry for that, won't happen again.

Incidentally, Rick - if there is any problem with verbatim reproductions of messages posted on your forum, PLEASE email me to let me know. I value your forum here, and all participants, too much to intentionally commit any indelicacies.

- Jim

-- Anonymous, December 12, 1999

Jim - I'm going to ask the other forum regulars to chime in here re: copying to other BBoards. My incliniation is that proper protocol is to ask both the forum maintainer and the person who posted the question you wish to crosspost.

I have recommended in the past to people who have asked this question that they paraphrase the subject of the posting, then provide a link back to the energyland.net website. Anyone that's truly interested in the subject / topic from the other board will request a password and contribute to the discussion. Most importantly, this method allows for continuity of the topic, and the responses don't get fragmented.

There could be copypright issues, as well, if an individual poster (or even myself) really wanted to get their panties in a bunch.

So again, forum regulars, what say ye?

-- Anonymous, December 12, 1999

Rick,

At least a couple of my postings have been copied in their entirety to other sites without my fore knowledge. It wasn't until I got private emails from readers at the other sites that I became aware of it. I have mixed feelings about it. On one hand I was somewhat flattered, (I even had one of my lines installed in an animated banner!) on the other I would have liked to have been asked if it would be okay. I don't think you can police that sort of thing so I just let it go.

Also, once when I went to the other site to see what sort of discussion was going on about my posting I didn't care to contribute further. The level of intelligence there was pretty low, very reactive and emotional, (not that I've ever done that;-) I've also seen a link to one of my postings from another site. I wasn't notified of that either but it seemed more appropriate than just copying it.

Proper netiquette, in my mind, would call for asking the author permission to copy. If that doesn't happen then "oh-well" Don't bust your brains over it. Notification of a link to a posting would be nice too. The world is going too fast for me to worry much about this sort of thing though.

-- Anonymous, December 12, 1999

On the subject of cross posting -

This is a public forum and while access may be slightly limited and regulated, it is still public. I participate here because it is generally a fairly high level of discussion by interested and interesting people. This also is one of the few places that my e-mail address is publicly posted.

Personally, I don't think that anyone should post anything on this forum that they would be ashamed of or not publicly distributed. Postings also should not be copyrighted unless you post a copyright notice or some such notice not to copy, even for you Rick.

However, the e-mail addresses should not be published with out the permission of the author. I am sure, like me, many others who frequent this site do not want unlimited access to their e-mail address by some of the literally 'flaming' A's that frequent some sites, even if they cover similar subjects.

-- Anonymous, December 12, 1999

I forgot to mention that once on antoher site I posted my address and made a comment about one poster's flawed and childish logic, and I got an e-mail threatening to send my computer to computer heaven because I challenged him. Nothing ever came of it, perhaps because several other posters put in similar responses, however, tt caused me to worry for several months, increase my virus protection and re-back up all my files.

So please, with all my postings, anyone is free to repost them, where- ever they wish, but not my e-mail address.

-- Anonymous, December 12, 1999

Bob, thank you for your comments. I see the logic in what you say, and especially your feelings about the sanctity of your email address.

I can't remember whether the password is required to even read these messages, or whether it's needed only to respond/participate in the discussion. But that is a mute point now for me, as far as anything I do in the future.

I will simply be sure not to copy anything, or specifically point to anything here, etc. I will go to bed tonight maybe half a chip wiser than when I woke this morning, thanks to all comments.

Paul, earlier today, I did start another thread for this subject. I'm sorry that your original question has become obscured in this thread. I think it is an excellent question you posed, regarding the way(s) that embedded chips are designed to fail, in a safe mode or not...

-- Anonymous, December 12, 1999

Jim,

Never gave cross-posting that much thought. I'm glad you find this an interesting enough question to want to share with a larger audience. Its obvious from the tone of your post and your concern with etiquette that you are not doing this with malice aforethought. Still, as I think about it, and considering the nonsense Rick had to put up with being publicly misquoted (or what's the word when they just make up quotes for you that you ever said), I can see how this could be a delicate situation. If one were taken out of context or cross-posted with frequent editorial insertions it could probably get acrimonious. I take it as a complimet that you would cross-post my question. For the future I would say guidelines of posting the thread in its entirety w/o editorialization, w/o posters e-mail and if possible with posters consent (though I don't think I've copywrited my stuff -> interesting legal question I guess, are these posts more like public articles or private mail) would be ideal. Incidently, I got a very well-thought out rebuttal to one of my posts by e-mail who prefaced it saying "A friend sent this to me" (I guess with my e-mail). Fortunately, it was a great reply and as it happened a good while ago I'm a little embarrased that I haven't responded yet. Which I guess means that I'm saying that as long as its done in good taste let's keep open the lines of communications. And no I don't care that you cross-posted this, just let me know if anything interesting comes of it as I'm not familiar with the forum you mentioned.

PDM

-- Anonymous, December 13, 1999

Just read Rick's guidelines for cross-posting and like those a lot better than mine. What do they say in Radioland "mega dittos"

-- Anonymous, December 13, 1999