http://www.nasire.org/hotissues/y2k/survey/

go to this website and choose the state of new york. read and eventually, you will get to read the 100% completions on i,a,r,t. Then read the "fine print" in the comments section. You won't believe your eyes. Out of all the systems that need repairing, out of the missin critical ones, out of the "top 40", you take only the ones that "impact public health, safety and welfare" and yes, by-golly, they are 100% compliant. Why are they hiding their true numbers? Don't everyone talk at once.

next, check out the grand state of texas where i live. let's see. we have more compliant(99%) and implemented (99%) than we have renovated (93%) and validated (93%). amazing!! next, in their fine print, it reads "Our mission statement: "To effectively apply and facilitate the use of resources to assist the agencies and institutions of higher education of the State of Texas in achieving Year 2000 operability". Texas Agencies/Universities do not report 'compliance.' They report 'operability.'

my state doesn't even want you to tell them if you are compliant (we don't want to know). just tell me if you are "operable" and i'll let you define that one.

-- James Chancellor, PE. (publicworks1@bluebonnet.net), October 18, 1999

Answers

Also, look at texas' budget: like i've been telling everyone around me "follow the money" and look them straight in the eyes when they are talking to you.

Out of $275.4 mil budgeted, $166.5 mil had been spent to date (10/1/1999 last updated). i get out my calculator and that works out to be 60.5% spent (EXCLUDING EMBEDDED SYSTEMS by their own admission)!! and to top it all off, my local walmart was out of spam last week (only the off brand stuff left)

-- James Chancellor, PE. (publicworks1@bluebonnet.net), October 18, 1999.

"off brand" SPAM?

maybe that's what I'll stock up on for "drop-ins".

-- plonk! (realaddress@hotmail.com), October 18, 1999.

As I mentioned in my post late last night, here in a Canadian city where I live, I took stock at THREE big-name stores on about a dozen very basic critical Y2K items, and there are PALLETS FULL of the stuff available in every store. It gets VERY cold here starting early DEC., and yet I see NO evidence for any buying, even as I watch people going through the tills. We got TONS of SPAM! I'll trade you one can per ounce of gold!

-- profit_of_doom (doom@helltopay.ca), October 18, 1999.

Wow that sucks... they have Guam and they don't even have Oregon... what's up with that?

-- @ (@@@.@), October 18, 1999.

There is no wording possible that would please some of you guys...........you are not living in the real world of how businesses operate.......

All statements are made in compliance with legal directives they are given from the company lawyers......there is no option in that.

The bottom line is that the vast majority of companies and govt. agencies have the situation well in hand and it is likely that problems that we encounter due to the rollover will be manageable.

Sure, taking any company or government statement with a grain of salt is advisable, however methinks there is an extreme paranoid element at work here that will not be satisfied with anything less than promoting an apocalyptic scenario........

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), October 18, 1999.

...you are not living in the real world of how businesses operate...

Well, Craig, that's the problem. We're kinda worried about how "real" that world of theirs is going to prove to be.

-- (illusions@re.us), October 18, 1999.

The publishers and source of faulty or questionable content regarding Y2K will feel the backlash if they experience major problems. Just because their statement is legally accurate doesn't mean the general public will be forgiving.

-- mil (millenium@yahoo.com), October 19, 1999.

Hmmm. Interested parties may want to review the NYC Y2K audit info available via this TB2K link:

"IIIII'll Leave New Yoooooork". recent Audits and hearings on NYC Y2K sitchiation

from above link:

TESTIMONY BY ALAN G. HEVESI, NEW YORK CITY COMPTROLLER ON THE STATUS OF THE CITY'S YEAR 2000 COMPLIANCE EFFORTS TO THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK FINANCE COMMITTEE AUGUST 31, 1999

Sample:" As of today, all of our client server applications and 87 percent of our mainframe applications are Year 2000 compliant. Our target date for Comptroller's Office systems completion of Year 2000 testing and full compliance is October 1999."

You can (and should) read the rest at: http://www.comptroller.nyc.ny.us/BUREAUS/PRESS/Y2k Testimony.htm

(Careful with that URL. There really IS a space between "Y2k" and "Testimony".)

In the above hearing, Mr Hevesi refers to an ongoing series of Y2K audits. The latest one is discussed in this August 6, 1999 press release which also summarizes audit results to date:

http://www.comptroller.nyc.ny.us/bureaus/press/releases/99-68.htm

-- Lewis (aslanshow@yahoo.com), October 19, 1999.

Forgot this warning: the comptroller.nyc.ny web site crashes my Netscape. Use Internet Explorer instead.

-- Lewis (aslanshow@yahoo.com), October 19, 1999.