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: Ken who wrote (5329)	4/7/1999 9:48:00 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 9818

Ok, Ron, you've succeeded in again provoking me to shread your attempts at logic, even tho I have refrained from doing so after a number of your last attempts. I love yanking your chain.... It's a powerful feeling ... <VBG> Correct, but what is your specific point here, in relation to my posts you are attempting to discredit? Attempt to discredit?? I don't have to attempt. You do a fine job discrediting yourself all by you lonesome self... The only one who doesn't realize it is YOU. You have so completely convinced yourself that civilization is going to end due to Y2K, you really make me wonder why you would want to exist in the kind of world you claim is coming down upon us 9 months from now. The absolutism of your generalizations here is a logical disaster in itself..Are you saying 'all staffs' will be prepped and ready?......... Listen Ken... my point is merely that Y2K is too obvious (borrowed from the Y2K manager for Texaco in his "Wired" interview). It is something that I have felt but was previously unable to verbalize so well. Almost everyone involved in systems's engineering here in the US is aware of Y2K and thus alerted to look for potential faults in their systems due date related problems. They also know they should make contingency plans. And for the most part, these people are not being permitted to completely ignore Y2K because their much larger customers are POUNDING the topic into their head and forcing compliancy by June 30th, 1999. Technological disasters occur when people are caught completely unaware by an unexpected failure. They don't have the time to preconfigure work arounds and contingency plans to prevent absolute shutdown of their operations. Now K.. k.. k... Ken, (sorry, I've had a bit of a stutter since I first saw "fish called Wanda") it is quite clear that much of the US infrastructure existed and operated quite happily before embedded systems and high-speed computers came into being. And in fact, computerization/automation was added SUBSEQUENT to the creation of the particular infrastructure in order to replace manpower with computer power. There is no reason that manpower cannot once again replace computer power, if need be in a pinch. <YOU ASK EVERYONE BUT YOURSELF FOR EVIDENCE>... In terms of logical debate, where exactly does that one fit in, Ron? Until you answer that, you'll never understand why people discount your opinion. But I'll give you a hint. Until you can provide the hard data that supports your "doomsday" scenario, you're no better than the rest of us who wonder exactly what the disruptions will be or how long they will last. I, for one, am willing to entertain all possibilities provided enough conclusive evidence presents itself. p.s. I am being easy on you here Ron, by not pasting here many other points you tried to make in other posts to me, then using my broadsword on them, also... Gee thanks... K..k..k..ken!!!