X-Message-Number: 10130
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 19:42:28 -0400
From: <> (Jeffrey Soreff)
Subject: Re: Y2K: I'm sorry, but you're nuts

>I'm really sorry to say this, but as a computer professional actually
>working in the financial field, I have to say that the hysteria being
>created is completely absurd, and exists largely because a bunch of
>people are making a ream of money off of it.

Fair enough, but on Y2K issues for enterprise system software, I'd rather
trust Cory Hamasaki's opinion.  He is working directly on Y2K remediation,
and he has posted examples of code which contradict your claim that:

>ISN'T HARD TO DO. Typically, you spend a couple of weekends running
>your machines with the date artificially set to 2000 or 2001 and
>things are quickly found.

>http://www.cpsr.org/program/y2k/
Thanks.  This is indeed a useful URL.  One of the pages linked from it is:
I have read their http://www.cpsr.org/program/y2k/rumors/sectors.html ,
which seems to be what you are describing when you say
>Not one story -- NOT ONE -- was deemed "Fit to print" by the New York
>Times criterion. They've examined HUNDREDS.

The summary chart in this web page shows
   80 rumors of all types,
    2 rumors "fit to print", and
   20 rumors "unconfirmed"

They define "fit to print" as
a story must be confirmed by at least two authoritative
                       sources, before it is "fit to print".  A source is

                       authoritative if he/she has independent qualifications to
                       
                       know the facts first-hand, or if it is a reputable 
                       journal.

They define "unconfirmed" as
An assertion of fact from an authoritative source, but not
confirmed by  a second source.

For example, one of the "unconfirmed" rumors was that
>A Toys-R-Us outlet in Albany had its entire check-out system
>knocked out when someone used a credit card with a 00 expiration
>date. Chashiiers [sic] used calculators and handwrote receipts.
with a source of
>eyewitness Brian Laslow, Digital

Admittedly, I do disregard some eyewitness accounts.  If someone
claims to have been personally abducted by aliens, I'm inclined to
ignore them.  If Perry thinks that reports of software crashes
should be treated with as much skepticism as reports of alien
abduction, that is his judgement call.  I find software crashes to
be rather more plausible events, and am inclined to take reports
of them from single authoritative sources quite seriously.

                                      Best wishes,
                                      -Jeffrey Soreff

standard disclaimer: I do not speak for my employer.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10130