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 : INFORMATION ANALYSIS (IAIC) - YEAR 2000 Date Remediation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Trocchi who wrote (1588)	5/9/1998 10:10:00 PM
From: ctirry	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2011

The unpopularity of y2k stocks of late has been pointed out by myself and others on this thread. However, as time goes on things will probably change. To wit, read the following excerpt from a GAO report on the y2k problem dated April 30: Year 2000-related problems have already been identified. For example, an automated Defense Logistics Agency system erroneously deactivated 90,000 inventoried items as the result of an incorrect date calculation. According to the agency, if the problem had not been corrected (which took 400 work hours), the impact would have been catastrophic and would have seriously hampered its mission to deliver materiel in a timely manner.\6 In another case, the Department of Defense's Global Command Control System, which is used to generate a common operating picture of the battlefield for planning, executing, and managing military operations, failed testing when the date was rolled over to the Year 2000. As stories are picked up in the press IMO y2k will become a hot sector.

To: Bob Trocchi who wrote (1588)	5/10/1998 6:05:00 AM
From: _scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2011

Henry, Elliot, cage, Bob, TED, Ok. I was beginning to panic and become a conspiracy theorist. But you have to admit that we're liable to see sub 10s before any of these elusive announcements appear and save us. And I still wonder what ever happened to Matt Kern. His post # 1451 really had me believing. He persuasively argued how IAIC is in such great position to benefit from it's "shrinked wrapped translators" and how he "honestly feels[s] lucky to have met [you guys]". But only now do I realize what he really had in mind with 1451. Matt was considering that post for its own sake, for the love of its value, for reasons only now apparent. Matt got to post 1451: another PRIME NUMBER !! And he's obviously also read Ray Bradbury's book "Fahrenheight [1]451" (That lucky dog). OK, at least TED can appreciate these these facts. You guys keep the faith during the next 2 weeks, because I won't be here to inflict my stupid comments.