Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cheeky Kid who wrote (6520)	7/13/1999 2:26:00 PM
From: Ken	Respond to of 9818

Y2K Challange to CK or anyone:Answer this y2k expert's questions! Interestingly and educationally, these questions drive pollyannas/denialists/the uninformed very looney because they CANNOT answer them! (I am not stating his name here as denialists attack names when they cannot dispute with facts). <<<The Two Seemingly Simple Things My Critics Refuse to Do To refute my view of y2k, here is all anyone needs to do: provide comprehensive evidence that either 1. Shows that the code, worldwide, is not broken any more; or 2. Shows that the code, while still broken, is essentially trivial in its effects. The critics do not do this. It seems so easy to prove that I'm wrong. Why don't they do this? Why isn't there a single Web site that provides evidence comparable to my site that demonstrates either #1 or #2? Most people simply cannot come to grips emotionally with y2k. This includes most of the people who visit my site. They are susceptible to arguments -- based on minimal evidence -- that y2k will not create a disaster. A few people take my arguments seriously, but they are wavering. If you waver, ask yourself: Where the evidence is for #1 or #2? Just ask the y2k skeptic to direct you to a site that shows either #1 or #2. >>