Wonder to what extent all the FUD mongers who forced companies to go into extreme overkill mode for Y2K remediation and testing, and retesting, and retesting ad nauseum are to blame for this? Productivity is a function of output for a given level of (i.e divided by) input. It follows that if lots of effort was wasted retesting and rechecking stuff just to play CYA and politically inspired appeasment games due to the hype and FUD created by North, Yourdon and many here, then output that WOULD have been created (resulting in a higher level of productivity, and thus higher standard of living) WASN'T. Thus, the lower productivity.

Another COST to us all thanks to the FUD mongers and profiteers of Y2K. Jerks -- them and you doomer drones and "usefull idiots".

Before you flame me, remember that the level of productivity determines our standard of living. So yes, the FUD mongers DID take money out of your pocket -- out of ALL of our pockets -- even if you didn't buy their books and other stuff.

The telling aspect is they didn't even get to make off with the money they "stole" from society in the decrease in productivity their FUD caused. No, they just made the entire world a bit less nicer for everybody to live in. All five BILLION of us. Says a lot about the (lack of) value in doomerism and FUD; a dark, profitless mentality indeed! If you want "sustainable living" or just the best world you can have, then throw out the FUD lest it rob you of the very QUAILITY of your life.

Suckers! Somebody got you again! Wise up! And don't get taken in so easily next time, 'ya hear?

-- ??? (???@???.???), May 05, 2000

Answers

The above was originally posted on the thread about lower 1Q productivity. Your thoughts? I'm wondering how many of you have learned enough to see this? And maybe realize you WERE taken in and "robbed" by the FUD mongers, Yourdon et all. Even if you didn't buy their stuff.

-- ??? (???@???.???), May 05, 2000.

I thought all that checking, rechecking, and upgrading was WHY the rollover was no big deal?

-- helen (home@the.farm), May 05, 2000.

Just one question asshole. What the hell is a FUD?

-- (you sure like that word @ don't you. dumbass), May 05, 2000.

But most of the redundant testing was done the last quarter of 1999, and productivity was much higher then than now. At least the way productivity is defined operationally (the standard indicator).

I think a lot of the problem here is that defining productivity gets damn tricky in technical fields like programming and engineering. If we have some measurement like "lines of code validated free of date bugs per hour", then the FUD made us very productive indeed!

Pundits in the engineering journals anyway (what I read) consider that the y2k remediation effort was a big net plus. Programmers became much more familiar with their code bases, old non-date bugs were found and fixed, a great deal of hardware and software was replaced or brought up to date, documentation was modernized or even created, obsolete systems were identified and discarded, on and on. Perhaps inadvertently, we did what we *should* have been doing for years. For the wrong reasons maybe, but with clear benefit and apparent cost-effectiveness.

In other words, we *increased* productivity substantially, by accident and despite ourselves, but that's what we did. You have to look at the EFFECT of the remediation effort.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), May 05, 2000.

Guess Paul Revere, was a fool. He saw a danger. He rode, Shouting, "Danger, Danger!". Danger perceived or imagined, it was real, in their minds eye. Some holksters shouted out the cry, to sell their wares. Other honest folks, side stepped the holksters, to try and forewarn others of a possible danger. Guess some "warners" of good intent or not, got their britches in a wad because no one would heed the warning. Imagine Paul Revere again. He would have been plenty mad to know he had taken a risky stance, only to have the sleepers rouse and say "It is only Paul, the simpleton, let us go back to sleep". He was crying "Fool, roust yourself!".

-- Life ain't (amerced@es.com), May 05, 2000.

It's May 5th...who cares anymore?

-- Uncle Bob (unclb0b@aol.com), May 05, 2000.

FUD = Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.

And, no offense, but as I have said before, those quickest to call someone terms such as "asshole" are usually most indicative of said terms ;)

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), May 05, 2000.

Anyone who makes these kinds of libelous statements about North and Yourdon IS an asshole, no question about it.

-- (and so is @ fact. finder), May 05, 2000.

"and so", Good grief, you're still defending North...and Yourdon??? Let it go man....! No libel here, Y2K came and went with a pffffft!

And the hypocracy of it all, you rant about someone being "defamed", and turn around and call people "assholes"? May I have a sample of your brain tissue? Such behavior, lol...

-- FactFinder (FactFinder@bzn.com), May 05, 2000.

Define Libel.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), May 05, 2000.

I've yet to see a convincing argument that Yourdon didn't believe what he was saying. Wrong? Oh yeah. But when it comes to wrong and knowing it Bob McNamara and LBJ will always be at the top of that very different list. Whip your favorite dogs, but how come you folk were so much smarter than the guys who actually had 600B to spend?

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), May 05, 2000.

In regards to the Paul Revere reference - where Paul Revere was warning people about danger, North and Yourdon seemed to be saying that it was already over, drop your guns, and hide.

-- Steve (sron123@aol.com), May 05, 2000.

Carlos:

You may be right, but you can't have it both ways. Either Yourdon was utterly fooled by what's been his specialty for 35 years (in which case he is a fool or a dunce), or else he was NOT fooled (in which case he was selling fear to profit off the ignorant).

You can decide between dunce and scoundrel in your own mind. By and large, the "scoundrel" viewpoint is based on the notion that even a dunce would have seen an error that flagrant by now, and would have no reason not to admit it.

I think people tend to forgive Yourdon his amazing "error" mostly by assuming his 35 years of experience don't count, making him as ignorant of computer systems as the rest of us. And if we "guessed" wrong, Yourdon could have done so as well! But this is like a doctor with 35 years of experience confusing a head cold with a broken leg. The ONLY knowledgeable computer specialists who made that error were selling something, be it books or newsletters or remediation services or recovery consulting. By coincidence, of course, right?

Carlos, at some point "follow the leader" no longer makes sense.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), May 05, 2000.

Aw geeze Flint. With the due respect you deserve, do you really think the corps that spent the millions bought Yourdon's book? Follow the leader? What leader???????? That was the real problem. OK, here we've the CEEPERs and other oracles that proved not just right but right beyond even they're wildest dreams! So far beyond in fact that they're probably not done eating or selling off their own preps. My problem is with the demonizing that has become so pointless that it's largely only the province of Y2KPro and his ilk.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), May 05, 2000.

Unless other people who were working on Y2K were a lot different than the utility folks, I don't think that Yourdon, North, et al., had anything to do with how much testing or retesting was done. None of us even knew that North existed and only those of us with some programming experience dimly recalled the name Yourdon. The amount of testing was determined by both how critical the item was and how much exposure to liability we had if the item failed. From this point of view, testing productivity (or the lack thereof) was driven by engineers and lawyers.

For some reason, Yourdon keeps being given credit for a lot more influence then he ever had, at least in the utility end of Y2K. Maybe he had more influence on the IT side but I doubt it. He was influential with the relatively small numbers who inhabited the Y2K subculture, and this includes both doomers and pollies. North influenced even fewer people who were doing any actual Y2K work.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), May 05, 2000.

"Define Libel."...

"the FUD mongers DID take money out of your pocket -- out of ALL of our pockets -- even if you didn't buy their books and other stuff."

"The telling aspect is they didn't even get to make off with the money they "stole" from society in the decrease in productivity their FUD caused. No, they just made the entire world a bit less nicer for everybody to live in."

Libel, defined.

-- (you got @ no .right), May 05, 2000.

Best said Jim.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), May 05, 2000.

Jim C, (and others, too, in so many words. Not picking on you only Jim)

you said:

I don't think that Yourdon, North, et al., had anything to do with how much testing or retesting was done.

Not true, sir. Fact is, because of their cries for independent checking and validation and calling of organizations to explain themselves and what they already had done, and have their customers and partners get into the CYA game so EVERYBODY could point fingers and assign blame ONTO SOMEBODY ELSE **IF** somebody didn't have their house in order, the FUD mongers DID cause organizations to spend DRASTIC amounts on PR and redoing things over and over again when it wasn't necessary just to satisfy and calm people about an issue that wasn't going to be an issue because all the work WAS being done and WOULD be done. Despite all the BLATANT calls of ANY good reporting LIES and SPIN by the FUD mongers and their lackeys and "usefull idiots", like was done by the original TB2000 moderators that did so in a way that would make ANY cult leader proud -- and the frantic search for ANY whiff of bad news they could find AND THE **CONSTANT** BLOWING IT INTO FEAR, UNCERTIANTY AND DOUBT FOR THE ATTENTION IT BROUGHT THEM AND THEIR WARES.

So soon the doomers **TRY** to forget and REWRITE HISTORY to suit their preferences! Fact is, significantly more was spent than needed to be spent to get the job done. Because of FUD mongers. But, what all the spokespeople said about it being money well spent was true -- but only because it BECAME NECESSARY to STEM THE FEARS AND WORRIES the FUD mongers did their best to whip up -- because of THE FUD MONGERS AGENDAS -- of PROFIT, EGO, and a disdain for a world and society they didn't care for. If they could have, the FUD mongers would have used mob psychology to create self fullfilling prophecies of TEOTWAWKI thru bank and food runs "just in case" and all the rest that would have made the gas lines of the 70's look like a picnic -- as they laughed all the way to their bunkers watching their bank balances rising from sale of their wares (with a few gold coins for show, no doubt! After all, you can sell those too!) -- all over a not existant crises -- JUST LIKE TODAY WITH THE PLANETARY ALIGNMENT DISASTER FUD MONGERS!!!!

WHAT A JOKE ANYONE TRIES TO DEFEND THESE FOLK'S FUD MONGERING BY RATIONALIZING OR ATTEMPTS TO REDEFINE THEIR FUD PROFITEERING. Heck, Yourdon even gripes he didn't make as much from his book as he could have made from regular consuting -- sour grapes from his FUD mongering efforts not selling more copies I guess! Why else would he have turned out a "revised edition" of the same FUD for his gulible target audience when nothing bad was coming true as forcasted? Why do you think he came back here in late 1999 to control "spin" and squash opposing views -- er, "moderate" -- his TB2000 ***FUD FARM***!! FOR FEWER SALES??? LOL THINK, PEOPLE, THINK! Anybody who can't see this about the leading FUD mongers of Y2K needs to have their head examined.

SHEESH!!

-- ??? (???@???.???), May 06, 2000.

??? = Asshole

-- (what @ a. jerk), May 06, 2000.

???:

Given your use of so many CAPS, ***, and long rants, I'm assuming that this must be you, CPR.

I understand that you hate the likes of Yourdon and North. That's OK by me. But, I'm telling you, they had no effect whatsoever in the utility Y2K work. You say they had some influence somewhere - prove it. What industry changed what they did because of these people? What business changed how they approached Y2K work because of anything that was said by North or Yourdon?

You're giving them too much credit. They were small voices in a big crowd. They believe they had more influence than I ever saw that they had and you're assisting them in their work. What was happening on these internet fora was merely a footnote to Y2K and it will always remain so no matter how much you want it to be otherwise.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), May 06, 2000.

Lotsa caps. Must be my little buddy CEEPER.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), May 06, 2000.

Nope, not creeper. Who started using LOTSA CAPS and exclamation marks in a pale imitation of his hero, cpr? Could it be...hmm...Mr. Louis Polly the bondage fetishist from St. Louis??? Yes, I think it is. Run, Louis, RUN!!!!!! The FUD will get you!!!!!!!!!

-- (FUD@R.us), May 06, 2000.

Jim C,

LOTS of industries. How about the airlines and banks for starters? I think they aimed at banks because if they caused bank runs they knew other panics would follow. Banks tested and retested for public show and put on their PR shows. Turned out TPTB were telling the truth. It was the doomers, FUD mongers and censoring sysops that were engaged in "spin". Do you have a brain to think with man? THINK! REMEMBER!!

Not that you would have heard much acknowledgement of that fact from the FUD mongers. Remember all their talk of telecommunication FUD FARM worries and the JAPS not having their old IBM banking software compliant because it just couldn't be done in time, and how that would bring down the whole global system so **BUY** YOUR PREPS NOW!!

I do.

Remember all the hoopla to publically insist that airplanes WOULDN'T FALL FROM THE SKY AT ROLLOVER? How about our Military and intelligence communities. All the useless work they did for their governmental authorities they had to give reports to and testify before -- over nothing. Just so the politicians could play the same CYA games the CEO's and their lawyers were playing. Remember that nuclear launch command center for the Y2K FUD about missles launching accidently? You think that was done ONLY because of real concerns and not public concerns due to FUD?

All the STAFF TIME by senior executives and the troops they assigned the actual work and rework to. Just to allay public fears when they should have been ramping up to internet speed?

And you people who accuse me of being CPR -- I'm not, but what if I was? Would that invalidate my arguments? Or is that all you idiots can do is attack the messanger because you don't LIKE his/her points - - but know they're true. Talk about a bunch of infanitle middle age and older adults!

Do you want a loppy pop with that second childhood? Well, do you? You sure do post like it!

ROTFLMAO!! Idiots!!

-- ??? (???@???.???), May 06, 2000.

FUD@r.us,

Can't you find any POINTS TO DEBATE instead of throwing darts at the old TB's percieved enemy list. No, not CPR. Maybe ???. No, maybe??? And you people pick on LL for thinking a poster is one person after another? ROTFLMAO. Ever stop to think I might incorporate SEVERAL aspects of SEVERAL folk's styles just to throw you off??? You are SO easy!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH Now who am I??? Milne? BWAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAH How about now? *sigh*

ROTFLMAO!! Idiots!! And you people talk about this place being for discussion and debate? It's not. And I just tricked you into proving it quite nicely. Several of you. Thank you very much!!

Fact is, this place is still the same. Determince the "side" the poster is on, then interpret and flame or agree based on how you percieve him/her agreeing with your preconcieved positions. BUT!! At all times! ATTACK THE POSTER, NOT HER POINTS IF YOU CAN'T DISPUTE THEM. At lest Jim C tried a little!

You are right about one think though. After you all proved my point nicely, there IS no reason to stay. That's for sure. What for? to see Manny makean ass out of himself and all the rest of you powder his nose? Especially when he calls cinloo a c#*! ???

Losers one and all. BYE (and good riddance). But thank you all for proving my point so nicely. And so quickly!

BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHA Who am I now?

*sigh*

Shift happens. SHIFTING OUT OF HERE! bye!!

-- ??? (???@???.???), May 06, 2000.

I take it back ???. CEEP aint a pup.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), May 06, 2000.

What a coincidence. He spells (or rather doesn't spell) just like Mr. Louis Polly. I'd say buh-bye, Louis, but I see you've already started another thread. Enjoy yourself. And, don't forget to FLUSH!!!!

-- (FUD@R.us), May 06, 2000.

Carlos,

I think it important to understand context. To Yourdon, based on his limited direct experience, 20+ years ago(light years in tech years), yes Y2k did probably look like a mess waiting to happen.

Remember, was it not just late last year the Eddie found out about Jini technology? (Jini is programming format which connects many everyday appliances as if they were clients on a network. Bad definition, but enough to know this Jini thing promises to connect most everything together and was rolled-out by Sun Microsystems a full year before Yourdon "discovered it"). BTW, Jini was no secret and most in Tech had heard about it.

Yourdon is supposedly "connected", however appears to have to do his own webmastering, and has to resort to free webboards for exposure. Nothing wrong with this, I have done it, but IT Guru Ed Yourdon? This alone tells me the guy is not even close to any heartbeat or IT inner circle. Research of his webhost told me the guy is not even capable of shopping for a host without getting raked, MHO.

Hamasaki is similar. He comes from what field? Fixing old mainframes. To him, Y2k is an everyday event most likely, and extrapolated his experience as common through-out his field. He saw the calendar and his 1979 "discovery", and freaked.

Aside from professional FUDsters like North and Hyatt, most of the doomers who were techies suffered from context blindness at the minimum. As time went-on, they became "involved" in Y2k for better or worse. North, Hyatt and clearly Mike Adams(Y2knewswire)had clear intentions from probably the get-go and I feel are different animals. These are "packagers", professional Fear-Uncertainty& and Doubt pushers. These move-on and do not care one ioda really about being wrong. To them, they gauge success by how many suckers they milked.

Easy to award intelligence to types like Yourdon, who really have not a clue about what they are babbling on about. Error is expecting them to have any clue beyond whatever it was/is they are involved with. History has proven they did not posess anything approaching a BIG PICTURE understanding. They extrapolated grains of sand into statues.

Honestly I do not think Yourdon for one, to this day, gets anything really about Y2k. Like many, he actually thinks the so-called "work" was the main reason for a smooth rollover. No doubting the work mattered, this is a nobrainer, a given. However to understand MOST did squat, as the risk was truly not even worthy of attention by most, is truely myopic. Few are even done to this day. What is NEW about any of this Y2k BS anyhow really? Ed is from a different era when a+b=c and one "could" do nothing else. He is out-of-date, has been for probably at least 15 years in my estimation. He gave-up keeping-up, and decided the dough from rehashing old programming stories was more profitable and easier(it has been).

Maybe this is why one could view Eddie as not being wrong. In his world, he wasn't/isn't. Too bad for any following this dinosaur my take. Heed the warning::::do your own checking.

-- Attack-Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), May 06, 2000.

The planets aligned long enough for this post by Uncle Bob....It's May 5th...who cares anymore?

-- Uncle Bob (unclb0b@aol.com), May 05, 2000.

Now Bob, I am surprised at you. Have you not been following? I suspect that indeed there is in fact still some interest worth "exploring"(if you get my drift). You do have one of them FUD type websites don't ya? I would take the "they are covering all the glitches up" vain if I were you on this post Y2k business. Remember, just cause Adams has drudged(no pun intended)the river, does not mean there are not a few nuggets of cheap FUD bucks around. Why look a gift horse in the mouth?

Just wanting to help.......

-- Attack-Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), May 06, 2000.

Doc,

There's nothing you say that I can refute. Your synopsys seems plausable to me. Still, I've never seen anything to convince me that Yourdon didn't think he was right if even not for the best of reasons. Questions unanswered: Did Yourdon cause 600B+ to be spent on something that never existed? I'm not a fan for IT heros saving the day considering Asia's lack of even a bump. Who the hell wrote the Naval War College stuff? I have a copy. Was that just bullshit? Is the Naval War College bullshit? Could be. Would like to know. State Department web stuff on Venezula worried me. Keep this up and I could begin to distrust my gov. Naw. Can't do that. Aw geeze Doc, this whole now goofy mess has helped me to be more independent on a lot of fronts and that feels good. Kiss Pats for me. Carlos

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), May 06, 2000.

Okay, we've got Carlos saying, "I've yet to see a convincing argument that Yourdon didn't believe what he was saying." Not going to argue that one; would take years, and we'd end up right back where we started.

But let's try this one: Ed Yourdon saw EXTREMISM, HATRED, outright MURDEROUS INTENTIONS, stated right out in front of God and everybody, on his TB2k forum, and did NOTHING to stop it. Or lessen it. Or discourage it.

(There. I used a lot of caps too. Guess I must be CPR. As if he's the only person on earth with a caps lock on his keyboard.)

Yourdon STILL sees such things talked about on his new EZBoard forum, and STILL does nothing about it. For a good example, see this thread: click here. The Head of Ed even weighed in himself on that thread, where posters came just barely shy of advocating shooting their neighbors. Does Eddie Y. weigh back in, and discourage such talk? Nope. Just as he never did on TB2k.

That, to my way of thinking, is reprehensible. And makes Ed Yourdon a subhuman piece of shit.

Now, that would be libel if the proof didn't exist. But the proof does exist. On his own damn forums, pre- and post-rollover.

-- Chicken Little (panic@forthebirds.net), May 06, 2000.

Dang Chicken,

You're right, Ed should have had his Sysop minions exercise a heavier hand on the delete key. Never thought of it your way. Nasty stuff. Should have never made it us poor public folk.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), May 06, 2000.

Wonder to what extent all the FUD mongers who forced companies to go into extreme overkill mode for Y2K remediation and testing, and retesting, and retesting ad nauseum are to blame for this? Productivity is a function of output for a given level of (i.e divided by) input. It follows that if lots of effort was wasted retesting and rechecking stuff just to play CYA and politically inspired appeasment games due to the hype and FUD created by North, Yourdon and many here, then output that WOULD have been created (resulting in a higher level of productivity, and thus higher standard of living) WASN'T. Thus, the lower productivity.

Another COST to us all thanks to the FUD mongers and profiteers of Y2K. Jerks -- them and you doomer drones and "usefull idiots".

Americans' Productivity Rises at a 2.4 Percent Annual Rate in the First Quarter of 2000, a Slower Rate of Increase Than in Late 1999

It could be argued that Y2K's effect was slight, and that instead of a recession, it only slowed the rate of productivity increases.

More plausible to me, though, is the idea that much of the productivity gains of the past couple of years has been due to newer, faster, Y2K-compliant systems being put into use, replacing older, slower, non-compliant systems that in some cases may have previously been in use for years.

The deadline was Dec. 31, 1999.

Many companies solved their Y2K problem by buying all new systems. Now that 2000 is here, I wouldn't expect quite as many new system installations as last year. If, as they say, Information Technology has been a significant force in the productivity gains of the 1990s, then it should be no surprise that productivity gains are slowing this year.

-- Another (take@on.this), May 06, 2000.

Regarding public pressure affecting the remediation effort or increasing monies expended, I didn't see it at any of the sites at which *I* worked. There was no IV & V, and no one to insist there should be. This is not to say that other firms weren't under pressure. Arnold Trembley's remediation reports certainly reflected concern for public confidence. Maria has also stated that money was spent unnecessarily strictly in an effort to address every possible concern.

There were many folks lining up to make money off Y2k. Who told the lawyers there would be money to be made? They lined up twice for that one. I'd be interested in learning where folks FIRST heard about Y2k if their jobs didn't involve remediation. What drove folks to use the internet to get information on Y2k?

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 06, 2000.

Attack-Paulie...

The "Doomer" website was a service for all to go to for information narrow in scope (and was used to practice web building). The service is no longer necessary, therefore, the site isn't updated anymore. Also, I have never posted an opinion, only a topic containing opinions of others (mostly on topics of interest to me for reasons one might not expect.) This is my form of entertainment and my playground. If you notice, I rarely interact, I only observe...

-- Uncle Bob (unclb0b@aol.com), May 06, 2000.

No senior business person took North seriously. Very few ever heard of him. He had zero impact on Y2K remedial efforts.

Yourdon was a respected programmer. I bought one of his books on object-oriented programming (early 1980s). It was excellent.

Yourdon was not an expert on computer systems. He was an expert in programming.

Yourdon didn't do his homework. He didn't spend enough, if any, time in power plants. He didn't understand that a power plant requires about six people per shift to operate it if all the computers are in play, and about ten people if there are no computers.

Yourdon didn't spend enough, if any, time in power grid control stations. He didn't understand that a power grid control station requires about three people per shift to operate it with computers, and maybe ten without.

And Yourdon knew very little about embeds.

His impact on Y2K remedial efforts was zero.

-- (retired@and.happy), May 06, 2000.

This thread is the biggest waste of retard energy that I have seen in a long time.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), May 06, 2000.

It wasn't till now.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), May 06, 2000.

Carlos,

Don't know if you'll ever see this, since it's a few days later. Dug this thread back up on a whim.

So by your attitude you seem to be saying it's just fine that Yourdon tolerated, and still tolerates, such crap. By extension, then so do you.

I've lost what little bit of respect I ever had for you.

Not that you care.

Nor do I.

That's too bad. I had hoped that post-rollover, people who previously had differing points of view could meet at some sort of medium -- but if you're still going to advocate a point of view that excuses advocation of the murder of one's innocent neighbors (which you have practically done, front and center) -=- well.

You'd best not ever show up in my neighborhood.

-- Chicken Little (panic@forthebirds.net), May 09, 2000.

- ATTACK THE POSTER, NOT HER POINTS IF YOU CAN'T DISPUTE THEM. -

her points. ??? is female

-- scorekeeper (ur@dufus.com), May 09, 2000.

My questions: If the I.T. sector, is so specialized and limited, so that each "speciality", hardware, software, has no knowledge and can not function in other areas of the same profession, why the hell are they paid the big bucks for being experts when all they REALLY know can be likened to be a auto carburetor specialist who doesn't know jack about the fuel injection? When I pay big bucks, I want a Specialist! Once upon a time, a Supervisor of a department had to know how to perform every job in the department before they could be made supervisor. What happened to that concept? Now we are held ransom by different I.T. folks who only have a tiny, limited, bit of knowledge. How did this profession evolve into Demi-Gods? RANT, off.

-- Just Shows (togo@you.com), May 09, 2000.