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 : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Mansfield who wrote (2513)	8/30/1998 11:21:00 PM
From: Caroline	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

The program with Cory: broadcast.com You want the 8/28/98 broadcast and you'll need Real Player. I'm playing it as I write this and haven't seen the program yet. CB EDIT - y2k program but no Cory on the interview that I can see. EDIT EDIT - OK he is on this program, played the beginning of the .ram file again

To: John Mansfield who wrote (2513)	9/2/1998 9:56:00 AM
From: Ken Salaets	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Washington Update -- There will be a meeting on Capitol Hill today to try to iron out the final details on legislative language for a Senate Y2K disclosure bill, presumably to be introduced by Sens. Hatch and Leahy. Reportedly, John Koskinen will also attend the session. The principle negotiators are the NAM Y2K industry coalition on one side, and Bell Atlantic and GTE (i.e., Bell Atlantic) on the other. The telecom companies drafted the Administration's bill (now S. 2392 and H.R. 4355), and according to some, appear more intent on protecting their right to sue than trying to draft legislation that will motivate businesses to share/disclose Y2K-related information. Many are dumbfounded as to why the Senate is insisting that the NAM group, which represents 90+ percent of the business community, compromise with what will soon be a single phone company. If Congress fails to pass a meaning bill before it recesses in October (i.e., there are rumblings of a possible lame duck session after the elections), the finger pointing will likely get vicious. There will be no point in considering similar legislation in 1999, because it will simply be too late. Ken