Klinton & companies 97% Non critical systems now completed - Question for Paula Gordon - Does this now indicate a 9.5 on your disruption scale???

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Paula Gordon with 16 days left Klinton and company are now claiming 99.9 % of ALL mission critical systems complete and 97 % of ALL NON MISSION CRITICAL SYSTEM COMPLETE  does this indicate a 9.5 on your disruption scale? The Gov has done nothing but put the people to sleep  I now am convienced we are in SERIOUS TROUBLE. Time to spend another hundred bucks on 500 lbs of rice & 500lbs of beans.


-- Matt (16moretogo@toast.com), December 15, 1999


If you have more accurate numbers than 99.9% and 97%, please provide them. "We are toast" are not useful data for others to come to any conclusions on Y2K

-- Richard Greene (rgreene2@ford.com), December 15, 1999.


-- citizen (lost@sea.com), December 15, 1999.


No time left to come to conclusions - We are TOAST is my opinion!!! By the way, if the electricity goes out in North Dakota - It will not be Y2K - it will be one of their killer JELLY FISH!!! We will find out in 16 days how truthful Klinton is, "is".

-- Matt (16moretogo@toast.com), December 15, 1999.

Answer for Richard Greene--Yes Richard, indeed I do have more useful, accurate information. Percentage of mission critical systems fully compliant(remediated and IV&Vd)-roughly 30-40%. Percentage of non- mission critical systems fully compliant(same standard applied) 2-5%

-- Get Real (gaf@mindspring.com), December 15, 1999.

It depends on what you mean by 99.9% and 97%. Is that burned toast, mildly scorched or lightly tanned?

-- (Polly@troll.com), December 15, 1999.


"If you have more accurate numbers than 99.9% and 97%, please provide them. "We are toast" are not useful data for others to come to any conclusions on Y2K"

Let's see if we can do the math.....it took according to the GAO's figures to reach 99.9% compliance on a little over 6300 government mission critical computer systems from May 1997 to December 1999 and they also accomplished in the same period of time 97% compliance on 70,000 non-mission critical computer systems. How many IT techs does it take to screw in a light bulb, better yet where were these army of techs doing the remediation work?

Get real!

-- Cary Mc from Tx (Caretha@compuserve.com), December 15, 1999.


I may try to provide a more detailed response to your posting on the weekend. For now, I think it is important to point out that the Office of Management and Budget report that the President referred to on December 14 primarily focuses on the status of Federal department and agency efforts relating to Y2K and embedded systems assessment, remediation, and testing. The report is limited in focus to Federal government systems. My concerns, as I have written about them in my White Paper and elsewhere, have focused on a broader range of national and global matters. While this has included a concern for Federal government systems, my impact scale rating has never been directly tied to the "Y2K compliance" or "Y2K readiness" of departments and agencies of the Federal government.

Even if the mission and non-mission critical systems of the Federal were 100% compliant, my provisional 5.5 to 9.5 December rating would remain the same. (That rating is discussed on my GW website at http://www.gwu.edu/~y2k/keypeople/gordon. Click on "Comments, Essays, & Op-Ed Pieces" for my December Comments and Impact Rating.)

-- Paula Gordon (pgordon@erols.com), December 15, 1999.

I think you folks are misunderstanding Matt. Paula's 5.5-9.5 prediction left open the possibility that the Feds could fess up and mobilize everybody. Matt's point is that such a dubious claim clearly shows they have not, and, as a consquence, forces Paula to the 9.5 end of the scale. I get that right Matt?

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), December 15, 1999.


I think the point is that the Federal government is NOT going to do anything to make the public more aware. Whether or not this recent claim is dubious, (and it is) the lack of awareness will continue as to the local implications of a global Y2K problem. The public will hit the Y2K at full blast, and that is exactly what Paula and others have been urging the government to avoid.

Looks like they decided to disregard that advice.

-- Dog Gone (layinglow@rollover.now), December 15, 1999.

You summed it up for me beautifully Dave. I believe this last ditch effort by Klinton & company is the icing on the cake. Toast time folks - face it we've been LEWINSKIed.

-- Matt (16moretogo@toast.com), December 15, 1999.

Oh yea,ask Paula Gordon. Give her a few days to peruse websites so she can gather enough information to put it all together and give you "her" educated answer.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), December 15, 1999.


That was pretty much uncalled for. Are you usually this grouchy this time every month?

-- Dog Gone (layinglow@rollover.now), December 15, 1999.

Probably no worse than a 9.4...

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), December 16, 1999.

Dog gone,

Nice try, but I don't suffer PMS and never did. But it is usually a good comeback from a male when they have nothing else to say. But thats probably an ego problem with males who's big ego is inversly proportional to the size of their.....nose. Or just the functional ability of their....car.

You wouldn't own a convertable would you?

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), December 16, 1999.

Cherri, I think you've gone over the top here.


-- MinnesotaSmith (y2ksafeminnesota@hotmail.com), December 17, 1999.

Cherri is just jelous that she was not asked for her opinion.

-- Noone (Nooone@none.com), December 17, 1999.

gee Minnisota, Did I touch a sore spot?

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), December 21, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ