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: David Eddy who wrote (4953)	3/21/1999 11:54:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 9818

Basic problem is that folks "at a high level" are accustomed to dealing with summarized (and obviously sanitized) data. Particularly dangerous is the tendency to add things up in spreadsheets. David, I concur completely. Most information received by the White House is so summarized, and lacking the not easily quantifiable information that some gatekeeper has previously ommitted that oftentimes important information that might add "texture" or help to tie things together is missing. Or sometimes the White House gatekeepers just don't want to hear unsubstantiated bad news and they send the report back for more clarification and factual data. Clearly the Y2K issue is so complex and the technology so arcane to many people who like our president (who has admitted he doesn't even know how to type), that they have difficulty not believing this is some overreaction by the techies. As for the B2/F16 analysis, I guess it might depend on the way technology was applied. The F16 was the first "fly by wire" flight system and much of its technology is still '80s vintage (like the space shuttle's 5 redundant computers which are, if I recall correctly, 80086 CPU level technology). I'm just guessing here, but it may have to due centralizing the controlling computers into two different systems, one a primary, and the second a backup. I really don't know. I remember when a year back I expressed some concern about the Army's MIA2 Abrams and M2/3 Bradley AFV's, both of which make extensive use of electronic range-finding and targeting systems. I worred that there may be latent Y2K issues in what I have heard are some 50 various embedded systems that exist in the Abrams (I haven't been able to confirm this). Without the ability to shoot and move, we're looking at multi-million dollar, 70ton paper weights. There are some gov't agencies that are leading the way in handling Y2K, and a close associate of mine, who is performing IVV work for Treasury is VERY confident that many, if not all, of their systems are going to work fine. Of course this person's work is primarily related to US Customs, but many of their systems, especially telecom, are used throughout the gov't. They have actually sent representatives to witness and physically verify vendor compliance tests, so intent were they not to just take the vendors word on compliancy issues. But I agree... overall the folks upstairs are only now beginning to fully understand the beast they are dealing with. But I still believe that technology exists to make our lives easier. While we are dependent upon it, I don't subscribe to the fact that we will be left utterly helpless by select failures. The wild card in all this is, of course, the power grid and related infrastructural utilities. Without sound and reliable power, nothing else will matter. But I'm sure you will agree that power will not be out forever. We'll pick up the pieces and put them back together (hopefully in an even more efficient and reliable manner). Btw, I've enjoyed your articles considerably. Regards, Ron