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 : 2000: Y2K Civilized Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Mansfield who wrote (354)	8/19/1999 8:37:00 PM
From: NickSE	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 662

Navy Predicts Widespread Y2K Failure search.washingtonpost.com WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Navy report predicts ''probable'' or ''likely'' failures in electrical and water systems for many cities because of the Year 2000 technology problem -- an assessment more dire than any other made by the government. President Clinton's top Y2K adviser, John Koskinen, called the Navy's conclusions overly cautious, saying they assumed that major utilities would fail unless proved otherwise. The most recent version of the study, updated less than two weeks ago, predicted ''probable'' or ''likely'' partial failures in electric utilities that serve nearly 60 of roughly 400 Navy and Marine Corps facilities. The study predicted ''likely'' partial electrical failures, for example, at facilities in Orlando, Fla.; Gulfport, Miss.; Fort Lauderdale, Fla.; and nine other small- to mid-size cities. It also predicted ''probable'' partial water system failures in Dallas; Nashville, Tenn.; Houston; Baton Rouge, La.; Montgomery, Ala; Tulsa, Okla.; and 59 other cities. The study forecast likely partial natural gas failures -- in the middle of winter -- in Albany, N.Y.; Fort Worth, Texas; Pensacola, Fla.; Charleston, S.C.; Columbus, Ohio; and Nashville. The military report contrasts sharply with predictions from the White House, which weeks ago said in a report that national electrical failures are ''highly unlikely.'' The White House report also said disruptions in water service from the date rollover are ''increasingly unlikely.'' Koskinen, who vouched for the authenticity of the Navy report, noted that all its worst-case predictions for failures were marked as ''interim'' or ''partial'' assessments. ''It's not nearly as interesting as the world coming to an end,'' said Koskinen. ''The way they worked was, until you have information for contingency planning purposes, you ought to assume there was a problem.'' The Year 2000 problem occurs because some computer programs, especially older ones, might fail when the date changes to 2000. Because the programs were written to recognize only the last two digits of a year, such programs could read the digits ''00'' as 1900 instead of 2000, potentially causing problems with financial transactions, airline schedules and electrical grids. The Navy report was first summarized on an Internet site run by Jim Lord, a Y2K author, who said he obtained it ''from a confidential source of the highest reliability and integrity.'' ''The military has to work from the worst case, but so do we,'' Lord told The Associated Press on Thursday. ''It's reprehensible for them to know this and keep it from us.'' Koskinen said the Navy wasn't withholding information from anyone, noting that the continually updated report was available until recently on a Web site maintained by the Defense Department. ''The last people in the world the department is going to keep information from is their own people,'' Koskinen said. ''In fact, the whole purpose of the exercise is to make sure they can provide appropriate information to servicemen on their bases and their families. The report was pulled off the Web site two weeks, Koskinen said. Neither he nor Defense Department officials offered any reason why.

To: John Mansfield who wrote (354)	8/21/1999 11:05:00 AM
From: C.K. Houston	Respond to of 662

The U.S. State Department on Sept. 15 will release its biannual consular advisory -- this time including a list of countries expected to experience severe year-2000 issues. Industry analysts expect that Brazil, Indonesia, Italy, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Thailand are some of the candidates for the list. That means companies operating in those countries and sending business travelers to them need to begin thinking about developing action plans ... According to John O'Keefe, a State Department spokesman in the Y2K office of management, the Department's forthcoming biannual Consular Information Sheets will include year-2000 readiness assessments for 172 nations ... Following right behind the State Department, the Federal Aviation Administration, along with the U.S. Department of Transportation, will go online in September with its worldwide assessment of airline safety. The assessment will include evaluations of the readiness status of air-traffic control systems, global airport infrastructure including security, and the aircraft themselves. The information will be available at dot.gov ... Depending on the severity of the situation, it is possible that the State Department will call for the evacuation of U.S. citizens from certain countries, according to O'Keefe ... infoworld.com

To: John Mansfield who wrote (354)	8/27/1999 10:09:00 AM
From: flatsville	Respond to of 662

John--I know you'll appreciate this courtesy of csy2k: (Sorry no deja link yet.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Oh my, oh my, there's more -bks-. Zolt thought he was done at ESO 9905!!!!!! Phoole me twice, shame on me!! Note the timestamp. On Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:49:05, ZForray@SATURN.VCU.EDU (Zoltan Forray) wrote: > Well, I just checked the IBM Y2K stuff and while 2.X is considered READY* > (meaning PTF's are required), I did dig further and found lots of hot, "hot" ??? > recent, HIPER YR2000 fixes. This is going to be a bumpy ride. We thought we bumpy ride? Why??? > were finished at ESO 9905. Some of these fixes are July issues (just got the > tapes for 9906-9907 today !!). Note the two "!" above. > > Where will it ever end ???? Note the phrasing, "ever". > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dan McLaughlin <Damclaugh@AOL.COM> > Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main > To: <IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU> > Sent: Thursday, August 26, 1999 3:21 PM > Subject: Re: ISPF y2k ready? > > > Along this line...my boss just said I need to do some homework on OS/390 2.8 > to be ready for production before 4th quarter ends as "2.5 is not Y2K > ready".. > My IBM'er who happened to be here working some maintenance with me looked > as disbelieving as I did. Has anyone else heard this? I know that the MVS My IBM'er .... disbelieving? Why? > CP > people look in and would welcome their comments as well... > > MTIA.... > Confused In Atlanta "Confused" ???? Yo! No problems with Banks, "Banks Get it!" How could Banks be so F'ing sure they were done on June 30, 1999 when Zolt and Dan are talking about getting the 9906-9907 tapes with the HIPER YR2000 fixes at the end of August, 1999. Well, maybe Banks have peanut brains? (Note, in the interest of a new, kinder, gentler c.s.y2k, I'm not saying that -bks-, JEM, Ken, or any of our Pollies have peanut brains. I am saying that the bankers and Kosky have peanut brains though.) Say the words people, "50,000 IBM style mainframes run the civlized world." Hey but maybe this will turn out to be a cosmetic problem, maybe we can get the fixes installed in the next 127 days. I hope so. Are we betting our lives on it? Maybe, maybe not. How close is that 7-11? Are we betting our life savings on it? Maybe, maybe not. Do you feel lucky today? Well. Do you? cory hamasaki kiyoinc.com If I remember, I might natter more about what 9906 means in the MVS, -cough- OS/390 world in the next WRP. It's either the next one or the one after, that will go by mail to subscribers first, then up on the web for freeloaders a couple weeks later. Or, you can ask Wester-raag what this means and why some mainframer's are abuzz. Or maybe the pollies will tell you that I'm full of "Van Nuys". NO PROBLEMS!!!! NOBODY PANIC!!!!! LOTS OF TIME!!!! CALM DOWN!!!! IS 5,000 ROUNDS OF SS-109 ENOUGH? (I'm kidding.) --------------------------------------------------- and then a response to one of the more polly posters: On Fri, 27 Aug 1999 05:58:03, Whislin' Dixie <"dont.want.emaiil.from ya"@anyway.net> wrote: > If you worked in MY IT department, and I am sure in many others, you > would be fired on the spot if I read your silly BS in this forum. BS? Sorry pal, you didn't comment on the content of the post. Maybe you didn't understand what Zolt and Dan were talking about? If you ever make a comment on the specific technical issues raised, people might take you seriously. Until then, you lose. > smart as you are, I am sure you don't post under your real name. If I > was as stupid as you, I wouldn't either. Anything you say, "Whislin'" Please killfile me. On my newsreader it's under the option called "filter". cory hamasaki kiyoinc.com Note to everyone else, the 9906-9907 situation is serious. I heard through the geekvine last month that this would be a problem. Since the Pollies don't understand what this is all about, they're resorting to off-the-wall diversionary tactics. Essentially, the mainframe world is a year from compliance. The time can be made up but that is not a given. This by itself is no reason to modify your plans, that is, if you have plans. If you have been quietly exiting from go-go mutual funds, if you have 2-3 months of supplies and are gradually increasing them, if you have a few hundred gallons of water, etc, don't take this as an invalidation of your approach, as proof that you're dangerously underprepared. Similarly, if you're a Milne or InfoMagic, this doesn't mean that your fears are realized. The discussion between Zolt, Dan, the unnamed IBM'er, and the others simply confirms that mainframe issues are at least as bad as I have been telling you. This is a serious, serious situation but this is a trip-wire, an alarm. 126 Days to go and a bunch of normally blase mainframers are breakin' a major sweat. This doesn't mean you and I will be slamming 30 rnd mags into assault rifles in 127 days. This does suggest that every one of the 50,000 mainframe shops is not Y2K compliant and that every bold, proud, statement that "We're ready." is not true. There're still 126 days left. This can be fixed. Those of you who are still not sure about the seriousness of Y2K, I urge you to re-read Zolt and Dan's words and ignore my commentary. They are both highly technical, mainframe operating systems experts and have no Y2K agenda. Visualize Dan and his IBM consultant and consider that unlike our pollies, he is sharing a technical meeting between him, his boss, and his IBM rep. I've given you the original source documents. You have first hand accounts from inside mainframe shops. Contrast those (almost private) meeting minutes with the clueless rants and hype that "there's no problem", "I have a big-brain, Y2K is fake". Read Zolt and Dan's words, they're tired of this, fed up, and a little frightened. I am too but it's important the people know what's really going on. 126 days, 3,042 hours.