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.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (5824)	1/1/2000 11:31:00 AM
From: BDR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

<<Y2K fanatics...will claim that Y2K problems will still pop up after the dreaded deadline.>> I have already heard on the morning radio that we may have survived January first without any appreciable crashes but the "real test" will come Monday morning when everyone returns to work and turns on their computers. I wonder what they will be saying the "real test" will be at noon on Monday.

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (5824)	1/1/2000 11:55:00 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

Dear Bill: Do you know Cheryl's email address? I have 16 gallons of water and many tins of food available to her CHEAP. jdn

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (5824)	1/2/2000 4:54:00 PM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

) Y2K fanatics, particularly the right-wing Christian nutbars who - for reasons that still mystify me - long for the end of the world, will claim that Y2K problems will still pop up after the dreaded deadline. That way, they can shift their Y2K delusions into the same arena as the creationism nonsense. i.e. keeping a debate going in perpetuity without ever having to present solid scientific evidence for their nutty claims. So Bill, explain, please, why this isn't a bigoted comment. Message 12356474 You are, by the way, a poor candidate to summarize "right wing Christian" positions....As if they could be generalized so easily.

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (5824)	1/2/2000 6:47:00 PM
From: TRIIBoy	Respond to of 10293

Check out this pr news that came out on Dec. 31: biz.yahoo.com Maybe he was going to his bunker...

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (5824)	1/2/2000 6:57:00 PM
From: RockyBalboa	Respond to of 10293

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (5824)	1/2/2000 6:57:00 PM
From: RockyBalboa	Respond to of 10293

Umm, some say they aren't dead at all. Do you hear them? But basically, the article nails it - earlier claims by the Y2K industry have not materialized: cbs.marketwatch.com Especially: >>>>> From bad to bleak What happened? Only a fraction of Y2K computer fixes have been given to software and service companies, said Jack King, former chief executive of Zitel. Most large businesses chose to do the work internally. Many small businesses put off fixes entirely. For most Y2K firms, the bust started in late 1997 and went from bad to bleak by mid-1999. "We thought about 45 percent would be outsourced, and something closer to 7 percent actually was outsourced," King said. What's worse, much of the work that was completed by service companies was for a sliver of profit -- if any. Companies such as Zitel were expected to retain as much as 18 cents in profit for each line of fixed computer code. But King said that they were lucky to receive half that. Competition in the underdeveloped market was fierce. ..... <<<<<<

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (5824)	1/2/2000 10:22:00 PM
From: LiPolymer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10293

Bill, I'm not sure how you could deny there were actual bugs in both application software and embedded systems caused by computer programs confusing the years 1900 and 2000. Had nothing been done at all about the Y2K problem, the results of that would have run the gamut from annoying to catastrophic, primarily the former IMO. Be your architecture Jobs or Wintel, even the system you are using to read this post, if at all current, has been improved to remove Y2K-related bugs that existed in any previous incarnations. The "hoax" comes in when Y2K is made larger than the finite set of engineering problems that it actually consists of. There was a lot of fear-mongering and hype that Y2K would snowball into some sort of global meltdown of the modern world's infrastructure, that somehow Y2K would take on a life of it's own and propagate between uncorrelated systems. If this is what you mean by a hoax, then we are in some agreement. As for your comments on "right-wing Christian nutbars" <g>, it seems you are greatly misinformed on the tenets of the faith as professed by Biblical Christians. It is a heresy for any true Christian to claim to be able to predict Jesus' Second Coming, or to superstitiously attempt to assign it to some arbitrary, albeit "even", date or time, e.g. January 1, 2000. Matt 24:35-36 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. 36 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. (NIV) Despite the fact the Bible states clearly that only God the Father knows the End Times, an entire field of eschatology has sprung up amongst the scholars regardless. So it goes... BTW, in the same way science has yet to disprove anything in the Bible, there is no conclusive evidence to prove the case for evolution beyond the shadow of a doubt. Both viewpoints require great faith, but only one stands up to any legal-historical testing <g>. As soon as one of these scientists is successful in zapping nutrient soup with high voltage in order to "prove" how life on Earth got started, maybe it will be fair to say that evolutionists have solid scientific evidence for their nutty claims <g>. But then the mathematicians have a problem to solve, because the laws of probability indicate insufficient geological time has passed for all the mutations to have taken place from zapped nutrient soup all the way to homo sapiens! And just where did that nutrient soup come from in the first place? At this stage in your walk, far from having reached the end of yourself, it would be hard for me to explain the "peace which passes all understanding" or how Christians can long for the day their Savior returns. But I would suggest that you spend some time formulating your own opinion about God, and especially who Jesus really was, instead of parroting sound bites from the voice of secular humanism. But be careful, because many great men, much more learned than you or me, have tried to prove the Bible and Christianity wrong, ultimately finding their hearts and minds pierced by the truth. In that regard you may find the stories of Sir William Ramsay and Lee Strobel quite interesting. Regards, Gary Smith