Just this evening I spoke with a person who works for a phone company in a small town. We started talking about Y2K and he said they did test and fix their systems, which needed to be updated anyway. When asked if the "non-event" of rollover was due to these repairs or the possibility that Y2K wasn't really a concern, he replied that it was definitely due to all the work that had gone into repairing the problems. I tend to agree that things would have been much different if no money had been spent on repairs. Thus, the idea that Y2K was a big hoax is not tenable.

Now, a question that remains to be answered is what about those countries that did not prepare as well and likewise the small companies? It could be that their computer systems are not as complex, and therefore easier to fix on failure. It could also be that there are still many problems that haven't surfaced yet.

Finally, it seems that before the rollover, everyone was presented with basically the same facts; some chose to interpret them in the most frightening way possible, while others shrugged their shoulders or even laughed out loud or became angry. I do think that there is a tendency in some to look for a calamity. There are some who want to believe in a conspiracy, even when there may not be one. The "mission critical" companies were telling us, after all, that they were ready, and they were indeed. I do know that the media is usually biased, but I think that there can still be a basic trust that we give to people, that in general, they are telling the truth.

What lies ahead? Let's wait and see.

-- BeerMan (frbeerman@juno.com), January 09, 2000

Answers

Remember, all you pollies out there, that the wolf DID eventually show up for real!! "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty" John Philpot Curran -- 1790

-- Just Remember (boy@cried.wolf), January 09, 2000.