(Also posted on comp.software.year-2000. I thought I might get more help here.)

I'm wondering if anyone can tell me of any documents online from before 2000 in which someone argued (didn't merely state, but *argued*) for any of the following (the more of these, the better):

(1) Given some basic amount of remediation (or even not given that), a fix-on-failure strategy will work for most companies and government agencies. (2) The number of actual Y2K problems that will occur (to unremediated systems) is far fewer than is generally believed. (3) Almost all Y2K problems that will occur will be unimportant and cosmetic and almost all problems will be fixable outside of public view in any case. (4) The fact that most essential systems have been remediated by the end of 1999 (even if imperfectly) renders (1)-(3) even more significant.

I take it that (1)-(4) explain why, much to almost everyone's surprise, Y2K has turned out to be a dud. (Yes, I know "it's not over yet," but it appears that most of the problems that have yet to occur or be reported on are just not very important.) It sure would be gratifying to a Polly to be able to point to *cogent arguments* for these claims made prior to 2000, because such a person might be the only person who could rightly claim to have known that Y2K would be a dud. URLs along those lines would be very helpful -- thanks if you can supply any. (I can use them in an article I'm writing.)

Larry Sanger

-- Larry Sanger (lsanger@dialup.oar.net), January 16, 2000

Answers

Good points Larry (and thanks for all the good work)! I had a radio program on Y2K and NEVER could find anyone saying such things nor any articles - believe me I was looking for them and good backup to what they were saying. The station had one guy on another program and I was there too and all he was saying is that nothing would happen - power would stay on, phones would work, etc. The usual without any documentation or support just belief. I guess belief is pretty powerful stuff.

-- Sheri Nakken (wncy2k@nccn.net), January 16, 2000.

Sheri, so far I have been given the following links:

http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001FmM

http://www.koyote.com/users/stheller/debate2.htm

http://x28.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/viewthread.xp?AN=488484458.4&search=thr ead&svcclass=dnyr&ST=PS&CONTEXT=948051515.104136752&HIT_CONTEXT=948051 515.104136752&HIT_NUM=14&recnum=%3c376148FA.143A@my-deja.com%3e% 234/4&group=comp.software.year-2000&frpage=getdoc.xp&back=clarinet

http://x28.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/viewthread.xp?AN=508035266&search=threa d&svcclass=dnyr&ST=PS&CONTEXT=948051515.104136752&HIT_CONTEXT=94805151 5.104136752&HIT_NUM=5&recnum=%3c7o4pdv$1mo$1@nnrp1.deja.com%3e% 231/1&group=comp.software.year-2000&frpage=getdoc.xp&back=clarinet

http://x28.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/viewthread.xp?AN=534793353.1&search=thr ead&svcclass=dnyr&ST=PS&CONTEXT=948051515.104136752&HIT_CONTEXT=948051 515.104136752&HIT_NUM=4&recnum=%3c37FF9F8C.7988@my-deja.com%3e% 231/2&group=comp.software.year-2000&frpage=getdoc.xp&back=clarinet

-- Larry Sanger (lsanger@dialup.oar.net), January 16, 2000.

Cutting and pasting wasn't working, so I had to reformat the long URLs somewhat due to "invisible" stuff. clickable links to Larry's finds so far:

ONE

TWO

THREE

FOUR

FIVE

-- plonk! (realaddress@hotmail.com), January 16, 2000.

Several good links to articles written well before the rollover at www.y2khoax.com.

-- Sam Anderson (kilroytrout@hotmail.com), January 16, 2000.

Good points Larry (and thanks for all the good work)! I had a radio program on Y2K and NEVER could find anyone saying such things nor any articles - believe me I was looking for them and good backup to what they were saying. The station had one guy on another program and I was there too and all he was saying is that nothing would happen - power would stay on, phones would work, etc. The usual without any documentation or support just belief. I guess belief is pretty powerful stuff.

-- Sheri Nakken (wncy2k@nccn.net), January 16, 2000.

EXCUSE MEBut I have had a Y2K e-mail list for almost two years that details most of the subjects that "the experts" said would fail, with details and sources to the technical arguments as to why they would NOT fail.

I don't believe you people were ever looking for that kind of information, you just went along with the crowd gutlessly, not daring to stand up for the facts because "everyone else" thought these things would fail.

Amazing how many gutless wonders are suddenly appearing after the fact when I stood up, almost alone against the so called Y2K experts.

The fact that I not only looked for the facts, but found them and shared them against large groups of you people belittling everything from my technical ability to my parenting skills because I stood up to the likes of Dave Hall and disagreed with UK-IEE.

So stop the crap about the information was not out there. It was and still is. From my first post to Dejaggers list where I explained in detail that aircraft would not be effected by the Y2K date problem and fall out of the sky, on to the embedded chip BS that Dave Hall constantly touted and everyone expanded on, to biomed equipment that did not have to be remediated to four digits because 00 was just as understandable as 98 when used as a date stamp. Where were you when I would explain embeddeds and have D. Hall retort to every Y2K mail-list in existence with his insults? You ate up that mis-information about embeddeds from every web site that not only "reported" it but expanded on the horrific possibilities their failure would bring.

Doomers didn't "prepare" because some old legacy mainframes were going to mess up water payments, People got scared shitless and became doomers and prepared for the end of the world as we know it because of "embedded" chips failing in everything from nuclear power plants to hairdryers.

Far fewer people know and understand embedded chips and systems than know mainframes and definitely PC's. It was pure ignorance by the "experts" as well as those "reporting" about them.

So stop whining about the information not being there, because it was, you just didn't want to hear it, because you could not understand it and made your mind up that the "experts" knew what they were talking about.

I have said it over and over, it's physics, and no amount of consensus, no polls, no amount of speculation or opinions can and will change the facts.

The results you are seeing from Y2K are exactly what you should have expected to see if you take the "embedded" hype out of the calculation.

You were only ignorant of the facts because you CHOSE to be ignorant of them. If you are embarrassed over your "predictions" being so off the mark then you deserve every bit of embarrassment and humiliation you get over it.

I tried to give you the facts and just go back and all it got me was a bunch of insults, not only here, but on every maillist in existence.

I do not understand why no one is questioning the fact that Dave Hall started all of the embedded crap in the first place, even testifying before the Senate, knowing full well he was guessing and did not know the real facts. Why don't you ask him? =======

By the way, here is the introduction to my mail-list

With the wide variety of information about the Y2K situation, a lot of different views are being expressed.

Factual knowledge is power, it gives us the ability to form logical opinions for ourselves. With some people claiming "The End of The World as we now Know it", and Governments downplaying the severity of the problem, I hope this arena will be a place where facts can be discovered.

To subscribe, send an empty message to

year-two-thousand-subscribe@makelist.com

To unsubscribe, send a message to

year-two-thousand-unsubscribe@makelist.com

List Owner: year-two-thousand-owner@makelist.com

====== In the attempt to help fix the problems associated with Y2K, preferably by preventing them, I and others have found it frustrating.

In the attempt at rational, logical interaction we are distracted by many things. This is my place for those of you who wish to discuss and interact without distractions.

As there are many new people becoming aware of Y2K and seeking answers, I expect all to be treated with consideration and kindly guided to an area where their (by now redundunt-but they do not know that) questions can be answered. As for anyone who wishes to make this list an area to doom-and gloom, You are not welcome and I personally will close the door on you.

If you attempt to use misleading information, exaggerated statistics, scare tactics for your own personal gain, be it a book, a solution, a conference, or just to build up your own ego, and you cannot "prove" your "facts" (be they "In your own personal opinion" or not) You will be escorted out the door also.

This is MY mail list and these are MY rules. Be aware that I am also a Parent and no amount of whining, abuse, or tantrums will change my mind on these rules.

The Y2K situation is a problem, some say a war. I state it is a problem we can solve and a war we can win.

I believe in the quote below;

"I win by means of nothing but logic and I surrender to nothing but logic. I do not surrender my reason or deal with men who surrender theirs. I have nothing to gain from fools or cowards; I have no benefits to seek from human vices; from stupidity, dishonesty or fear. The only value men can offer me is the work of their mind. When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will learn. One of us will win, but both will profit.

Cherri

To subscribe, send an empty message to year-two-thousand-subscribe@makelist.com

To unsubscribe, send a message to year-two-thousand-unsubscribe@makelist.com

List Owner: year-two-thousand-owner@makelist.com

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), January 17, 2000.

Short version of what Cherri said: the embedded systems problem was never a big deal. That's fine, Cherri, but you quoting press releases from utilities was not persuasive. Government documents would have been more convincing.

And why should we have taken your word for it when you never told us what your credentials were? At least we knew what Paula Gordon's background was. With no consensus of opinion about Y2k, I chose to prepare--and I'm not sorry that I did.

-- (Prepared@and.happy), January 17, 2000.