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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Hunt who wrote (31857)	4/16/1999 5:53:00 AM
From: John Hunt	Respond to of 116770

The "Y2K Problem" and Nuclear Weapons << Consider this exchange from a December 8, 1998 Defense Department briefing: "Q.: When is that shared early warning center going to be established? "A.: We're hoping to have it done by late '99. It could be early 2000. It's a complex process, obviously. We will be building it in a facility provided by the Russians, and it will use some American and some Russian equipment as well. "Q.: Am I confused on this point? I thought the point of that was to, in case there was some sort of Y2K glitch in the early warning . . . "A.: That is one of the issues. "Q.: Then it's sort of pointless to have it in early 2000 then, isn't it? "A.: We're aiming to try to have this done in late '99. Realistically it might be done before that. But the fact that the system is not . . . if it is not done by the end of 1999, it doesn't mean that this work is useless because we will be sitting down with the Russians, working very closely with them, designing systems, designing sort of exercises on shared early warning tasks . . ." >> << On the other hand, each of the military services has its own ground receivers, which may behave idiosyncratically. For example, the navy's software for processing GPS data interpreted January 1, 1998 as the 366th day of 1997.7 Reports from the Defense Special Weapons Agency, the unit that oversees the warhead stockpile and other programs at Sandia Laboratories, designated three mission-critical systems as Y2K compliant without actually testing them. This was not, concluded the department's inspector general, the result of deliberate falsification-just ignorance. Marvin Langston, the deputy assistant secretary for C3I, told USA Today, "I think there's very little real mischief going on here. There aren't as many people lying to us as there used to be." >> bullatomsci.org Ah, the wonders of the military mind! :-))