/* PROGRAM BEING MODIFIED BY MOD ON 02/02/00 FOR Y2K ATTITUDE ADJUSTMENT */

/*

I really do not believe this! Why is everyone buying this "Y2-OK" Media Hype WHOLESALE? Did any of these reporters ever write a line of code? Do these people truly understand the problem in the first place? If one single life is lost due to Y2K, how could we have been Y2-OK. There are so many permutations and combinations of events that it simply is NOT POSSIBLE to say that nothing dangerous will occur.

One possibility does not seem to have bitten us YET. There was a lot of hype regarding these embedded controllers prior to Y2K with the result that many expected the effects to be immediate. I admit to knowing very little about embedded electronics when it comes to the Y2K issues involved. It was up to the experts who created them to tell us that and the people who belived their fears should not be labeled "DOOMERS".

The people that are making fun of Y2K and making fun of those that take it seriously are simply illustrating their own ignorance. Just because a worst case scenario disaster did not occur as feared, does not mean that the danger is gone. In fact, the complacency generated makes the situation even more dangerous.

Have any members of this Y2K-OK camp come from an ERP background? Enterprise Resourse Planning Systems are widely used by Electricity Generation, Electricity Transmission, Water, Mining, and Aviation Companies to mention but a few. Even Microsoft use one supplied by a third party vendor. In general, these third party vendors are responsible for certifying the software Y2K Compliant in writing. This is how all these written statements started to surface in the first place, in MISSION CRITICAL SYSTEMS, supplied by third party vendors. This degenerated to the point that everybody requested a Compliance Statement for everything, mission critical or not. This detracted from the original motives and people actually failed to appreciate the real life-threatening danger.

ERP systems typically have a number of modules. These typically include Maintenance, Stores, Purchasing/Requisitioning, Finance and many more. The product is so big that consultants specialise with one module only. Y2K testing becomes a huge task involving many consultants and the reality is that in som cases, these tests a minimal because at the end of the day, the client can fall back on the Compliance Statement in the event of a disaster.

Modules are licensed seperately. I have seen bugs that are specific to the configuration of system settings and/or module configuration. In addition, there are many platform specific issues. If you can appreciate this complexity for a minute, then you can see the scope for nasty things being missed during Y2K Testing.

I worked for 5 years on such products. I have seen problems that persisted for two years due to either data corruption or difficulty recreating the problem. It is very frustrating to have an intermittent problem that neither you or the client can reproduce, despite the fact that the data originally invloved is evident. Finding and successfuly testing a Y2K fix in such an environment is painful and difficult.

The Electricity Generation could be nuclear, hydro or gas turbune. The Maintenance module is responsible for generating THOUSANDS of PERIODIC WORK ORDERS which are executed by crews. Equipment requires Lubricration, overhaul, periodic replacement etc and these automatic work orders are generated by the system based on SCHEDULED DATES. If for example one component which has an overhaul due is not picked up by the system, the effect is that the system generates 10,562 Work Orders instead of 10,563. The next periodic run may not be for a month! I think even the people debunking Y2K should see the inherent danger here. What is the result? UNKNOWN!!! It depends on what the component is etc etc. This is not a problem for the Electricity companies alone, its an example to illustrate the scale of the problem facing all utility companies and the airlines (yes they need maintenance too - or the might just FALL FROM THE SKY)etc. I hope this illustrates how dangerous it is to say we are Y2-OK.

Disaster is not gaurnteed. Neither is smooth sailing like we are "experiencing". Why have no year end problems been reported to date in the entire world? Because these companies MUST retain confidence in the markets thats why. The only thing we can be sure of are the facts. Most ERP Clients will only have recently upgraded to the Y2K compliant version. They are facing their first YEAR END PROCESSING RUN on this new system with converted data. I would also point out that it is not unknown in the programming world for a fix to actually have unforseen ADVERSE effects, with the so called fix being worse than the original problem. These can run for months before discovery. They will also have upgraded hardware, O/S and DB backend servers and done their best to ensure the client workstations are compliant. The "snowball" is already large enough for me without throwing any problems with Banking, Finance, or MISSION CRITICAL THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS etc.

The effects of all this are UNKNOWN. How major a resulting incident would be is idle speculation. We can only consider possibilities. One thing that is for sure is that incidents are LIKELY to occur. So far, the incidents have been mere "glitches" and if any have had an effect on operations we are not being informed.

In addition, the concern extends not simply a small number of ERP systems, it applys to them all. Why? because they are heavily date dependent. HMMM, I wonder if this extends to other date dependent systems? I don't know? Ask one of the programmers of those systems.

These people that are debunking the Y2K issue should be very careful. They are helping to spread this complacent attitude. This is not a time to be complacent. It is a time to be vigilent. Be suspicious. Do not trust blindly the systems you are using, particularly if yours is a MISSION CRITICAL Application with potential to disrupt infrastructure or put the life of another at risk. Instead be logical and present reasoned argument to support your theories and in particular do not be so fast to ridicule others.

I look forward to hearing a reasoned argument FOR Y2-OK. I am open to persuasion and if my concern can be shown to be unfounded then I will publically acknowledge it. Remember the WAR should be against the BUG and not each other. If the debunkers turn out to be correct then they deserve credit and I for one would acknowledge this. Ball is in your court guys ...

DEBUNK THAT

MOD

*/

-- anon ;) (mod@Y2NOTOK.com), January 02, 2000

Answers

Does anyone recall that movie from the mid/early 80's called "Looker"? About a company using computer generated people for commercials and such and they were killing the models off so they didn't have to pay them for continued usage of their images or some such thing?

Was watching a 'News' program and it was all the feel-good, Happy-crappy stuff we've been hearing since the rollover....but I swear I could see the bushes and part of a wall that was behind him thru the reporter as he talked and smiled and made it out sooooo good. Just made me wonder.....

-- Satanta (EventHoriz@n.com), January 02, 2000.

everything with regards to the media seems so ORCHESTRATED to me?

-- tt (cuddluppy@nowhere.com), January 02, 2000.

tt,

That's probably because it is.

But it keeps people happy...and that's what really counts, isn't it?

Baaaaaa Baaaaaaa Baaaaaa!

(Sorry, feeling kinda cynical this morning.)

John Ludi

-- Ludi (ludi@rollin.com), January 02, 2000.

When the lawsuits hit the courts is when the real truth comes out, Insurance lawyers will bring every thing to light. Insurance will dig to the bottom to prove that these "non Y2K", incidents were in fact all Y2K related. The dollar is the bottom line in all circumstances.

-- Notforlong (Fsur439@aol.com), January 02, 2000.

Hi Notforlong,

You make a fair point. I would be concerned again though that the insurance companies will be one of the first to be bitten. Their software would fall into the date dependent category. They may be too busy firefighting their own troubles or taking their own software suppliers to court?

They may also be troubled by problems in the Markets (or who knows what else?)

The power of these insurance companies and lawyers is their ability to lay siege and ultimately win cases. They depend on stability to do this. Yes, I know it is unlikely to get that bad but too many events over a short time = chaos

Regards,

MOD

-- MOD (mod@Y2NOTOK.com), January 02, 2000.