To: biffpincus who wrote (10093 ) 1/31/1998 1:50:00 PM From: jwk Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 31646
>> it was a very serious and indepth television discussion of an important societal issue (there's always a first time for everything!) that hopefully will prompt more of the same. << The FAA article I mentioned yesterday which was reprinted in the Denver Post from the NY Times also has a serious and urgent tone. It's not about embedded systems, but it does seem to move the popular media's accounts of y2k stuff a few steps away from terms like hype or scam. Here's a little bit of it. >>>A set of crucial computers in the nation's air traffic control system should not be used beyond December 1999, because they may not operate reliably when the date rolls over to Jan. 1, 2000, and there is no way to predict the effect on air traffic, according to IBM, which built the computers. ....... In fact, experts say, there could be many such land mines (couple of potential problems had just been described) - buried in millions of lines of code - that could cause failures for days, weeks or months after the new year. "We're kind of worried about it," said Jack Ryan, a former FAA manager who is now the air traffic control expert at the Air Transport Association, the trade association of the major airlines. "I think the FAA has the right sense of urgency, although it's a little bit late." Monte Belger, the associate administrator for Air Traffic Services, said the FAA should know within 90 days whether the computers can be debugged. The problem is that the date functions are not in programmin languages, like fortran or Cobol, but in machin language - strings of ones and zeros more basic to the computer than even the operating system........<<<<