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 : Y2K (Year 2000) Personal Contingency Planning -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (114)	4/19/1998 11:11:00 PM
From: Steve Woas	Respond to of 888

Dear Bad Math Bill, Chances are, she can count. Your documented bad math can be seen by all, anytime, by going to the hoax thread.

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (114)	4/20/1998 12:12:00 AM
From: jwk	Respond to of 888

Bill -- still waiting to hear a reasoned rebutal from you to the y2k article in the current issue of Fortune magazine. The IS exec from GM makes some very strong statements in what borders on alarmist language. TAVA receives major positive exposure (they have also just put out quite an interesting press release). Why waste your time debunking small fry on this thread when you can significantly increase your status on this issue by debunkng the Fortune article? Been asking you to do this for about a week now. Can you do it, or are you just going to keep taking pot shots at posters here?

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (114)	4/20/1998 1:24:00 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 888

Hey Bill, you stated "This is one I've NEVER received a good answer for..." 207.183.153.206 I supplied you with an answer and never heard back. 207.183.153.206 Did I finally answer your question? BTW, I know you well enough that you'll probably just answer "no" without an explanation. Spare me. If you can find fault with my logic please elaborate or else please acknowledge I've filled a terrible void in your life. Thanks. - Jeff

To: Bill Wexler who wrote (114)	4/20/1998 11:48:00 AM
From: Bill Ounce	Respond to of 888

MS Visual Basic is likely used for non-critical software While it's a good thing to squash false rumors, the tone of your recent messages comes across as rude, which works against your goal. They also focus on an area with limited economic impact which may make others question your knowledge of Information Technology systems. technical overview Ms VB is most frequently used for graphical user interfaces for Windows PC users. It's useful for front ends for database record updates. It's not good for overnight batch processing of the entire database. Database record update work-arounds likely exist in the base application that VB provides the GUI. VB, with its non-structured, non-object based programming/scripting approach is quite easy to produce non-Y2K compliant code. I would not be surprised if more than a few site have written their own date routines library with 6 or 7 bugs in it. This could be what she was referring to. But it's really no big deal compared to the systems that manage the bookeeping on accounts receivable and payroll. correctness versus scope I have noticed some "religious" style reasoning to support some Y2K beliefs. Non-supported VB (direct from Microsoft) bug claims may fit this, but your focus on this not-very-cataclysmic area makes you appear somewhat desperate. You earlier said that Y2K was a total hoax >>>"Now the computer industry has to deal with its own big, ugly hoax - it's called "the year 2000 problem". Exactly when and how this load of hooey started careening down the information-superhighway is not clear ..."<<< Your rebuttals of claimed VB errors does not demonstrate that Y2K is a hoax. A well written rebuttal of the Fortune article about TAVA would go much further towards your goal. Others have asked for it as well. If you are the expert that you infer to be, it should be no great task for you to do this.