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 : Year 2000 (Y2K) Embedded Systems & Infrastructure Problem -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Mansfield who wrote (519)	7/19/1998 5:07:00 AM
From: John Mansfield	Respond to of 618

'Subject: Byte Magazine, July 1998 - Year 2000 Issue Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 15:49:39 -0400 From: rcowles@waterw.com (Rick Cowles) Organization: What's that? Newsgroups: comp.software.year-2000 I picked up a copy of Byte magazine's July issue yesterday evening because of the Y2k cover story. If you haven't picked it up at your newstand yet, by all means hike thee over and get it. The article is good. I was particularly struck by one paragraph, because it applies (on several levels) to me personally: <fair use quoting> " There are those who say Y2K is just a lot of hype. The argument seems to be based on the fact that consultants and software vendors are making money from Y2K; ergo, it's a hoax. Hey, drug companies make money from heart medication: Maybe heart disease is a hoax, too. Now is not the time to complain that the lifeboat builders are making too much money. You'll have plenty of time to hoot and laugh on January 2, 2000, assuming you still have a company left. Until then, your best bet is to take what lifeboats are available and start rowing." </fair use quoting> (I may not have captured the entire context of the above paragraph, simply because it was in the middle of a larger discussion of the issue, and the author was making an analogy between a company to a ship. Buy a copy if you need the full story.) I said previously that the above paragraph applied personally to me on a lot of levels. I'm a consultant hawking Y2k services. I've written a book on the subject. I speak on the topic (and get paid for it). Yes, indeedee, I'm making a few dollars in dealing with the problem. Some folks in csy2k seem to have the notion that others of us in the n.g. who are actually offering Y2k services or information are right up there with the best of the snake oil salesmen. That we have the perfect issue to scream 'fire', so that the big company corporate exec's (who really don't know shit from shinola about the technical aspects of the issue) will, in a fit of corporate mob hysteria, cough up the big bucks for a bottle of Y2k elixir. That we're a bunch of self serving jerks who ratchet up the tone of the discussion for our self serving purposes. That the information and details we provide are suspect because we're not business virgins and our intentions must most assuredly not be pure. I'd submit to you that what you've got is a few people who were out on the leading edge of the issue a few years back, educated themselves on the topic, started offering assistance, and actually found a market for that assistance. The analysis of the issue by folks such as Peter DeJager or Ed Yourdon or Cory Hamasaki, and their ability to influence others, is a direct result of a lot of hard work, sleepless nights, and years of 8 to 5 career work prior to the Y2k issue galvanizing the sum of that career work. You can bet your last embedded chip that before Peter started making a nickel on Y2k, that he gave away thousands of hours of his own freebie time AFTER finishing the day job. Let me close with one thought. 10 years ago, companies like Smith-Klien-Beecham started quietly raising the corporate hysteria level about drugs and alcohol use in the workplace. Surprise, surprise - they had a vested interest in the issue - employee drug and alcohol screening (a multi-billion dollar industry). But are we all safer for knowing that our airplane pilots, nuclear industry workers, and public safety officials (police, EMS, etc.) must be somewhat free of substance abuse? You bet. But again, these testing companies have made billions in filling a necessary market. Don't discount the message simply because the messenger figured out how to make a buck on a bad situation. It's called 'free enterprise'. -- Rick Cowles (Public PGP key on request) Now Shipping From AMAZON.COM: "Electric Utilities and Y2k" - The Book euy2k.com

To: John Mansfield who wrote (519)	7/19/1998 7:42:00 AM
From: John Mansfield	Respond to of 618

'Blair's bug-buster plan looks for firm support Small firms are to finally feel the benefits of the bug busters project. But can it deliver? asks Bill Goodwin The œ26m bug-buster scheme to help small firms tackle the year 2000 problem is finally getting off the ground - more than three months after Tony Blair announced it. The first course was launched in Battersea by education minister Kim Howells last week. By this time next year, if government targets are met, 20,000 qualified bug busters will be doing their utmost to ensure that the UK's small companies are ready for the millennium. But with the year 2000 fast approaching, small businesses have yet to be convinced that bug busters will help them solve their problems. The Federation of Small Businesses and the Forum of Private Businesses point out that most of the UK's 3.9 million small companies employ fewer than six people. These firms, say their trade bodies, cannot afford to release key staff for training courses which may last up to a week, even with a subsidy. Anne Russell, as chief executive of the IT National Training Organisation, has the unenviable task of persuading the UK's small firms to alter their thinking. .... The training courses on offer Assess and manage: an overview for managers on managing year 2000 problems. PC applications: a course for the IT literate on how to assess and fix PCs. Embedded systems: a course for facilities managers on identifying and managing potential problems in security systems, lifts, etc. Fix programs: a course on identifying and fixing year 2000 problems in computer programs. Fix database: a course on converting databases. Fix operating environment: a course dealing with hardware and operating systems. All courses qualify for a 40% government subsidy, except assess and manage which has a 70% subsidy. computerweekly.co.uk

To: John Mansfield who wrote (519)	7/19/1998 7:44:00 AM
From: John Mansfield	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 618

' This could trigger shutdowns of systems that run credit card transactions and power grids. Or it could cause computers to spew streams of faulty data on mortgage payments and hospital records. Then there are "embedded chips": possibly flawed computer chips in control panels that operate everything from fax machines to supertankers. "These chips are everywhere," Koskinen says. In 1997 alone, world production of such chips totaled 4.2 billion, reports the Semiconductor Industry Association. Even if only one percent of the chips have date flaws, there could be many potential failures. "I suspect all the elevators are going to run . . . [because] that issue was seriously dealt with over a year ago," says Koskinen. But some tests have produced bizarre results. In Sacramento, Calif., he reports, all the doors of the county jail sprang open when the security system was tested for the year 2000. ... What worries Koskinen most are computers outside government -- and his immediate control. He cites two areas. First, other countries: They're reacting more slowly than the United States. Second, small businesses: Many don't think they have a problem. For example, the National Association of Manufacturers recently surveyed 10,000 small and medium-sized industrial firms with fewer than 500 workers. About 40 to 50 percent hadn't yet fixed their accounting or production systems. ... washingtonpost.com