Re: [CTRL] Y2K Overhype (Re: [CTRL] OEN 12/27/98)
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 12/29/98 4:57:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << So true, so true. Whether it turns out to be a bona fide catastrophe or merely a pretext for martial law, I think we need to start converting our anxieties about it into action, and use it as an opportunity for community building, community agriculture to guarantee continuity of our food supply, etc. Call me a kook, but I think we need to steal the ball and take it back down the court, knowwaddimean? --Charles >> Could not agree more Charles. When you SIGHT the ball let me know and then we can TRY to steal it back and then go back down the court! :) Teo1000 DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Y2K Overhype (Re: [CTRL] OEN 12/27/98)
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 12/28/98 4:38:46 PM, you wrote: >This is the whole problem with this topic. One does not know what to believe. >That is the whole point anyway. So true, so true. Whether it turns out to be a bona fide catastrophe or merely a pretext for martial law, I think we need to start converting our anxieties about it into action, and use it as an opportunity for community building, community agriculture to guarantee continuity of our food supply, etc. Call me a kook, but I think we need to steal the ball and take it back down the court, knowwaddimean? --Charles DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Y2K Overhype?
-Caveat Lector- >Yeah, who or what do you believe? If you listen to Gary North he sounds a >little too apocalyptic, yet his supporting information seems plausible, at >least to this layman. At the same time I've heard programers with nothing to >lose or gain say that yes, Y2K is every bit as serious as it's being billed, >and they knew it all the time. But guess what - today we hear that Social >Security's Y2K bug has been fixed and that they are now in 100% compliance. >Apparently it took 2800 people to pull that off (no time frame given) and they >came in a full year ahead of the deadline. If this is true, it seems >reasonable that everyone else, with a full year left, has a great opportunity >to fix their problem too, or at least that is what I would infer, if the >spokesman is to be believed. So who was that spokesman, that bearer of good >tidings? You guessed it! So where does that leave us? Who and what are we to >believe? > >As to the martial law theory, it's one that's been gaining momentum in >conspiracy circles in recent months. And after everything that's come down >since 1993, you don't dismiss out of hand ANY conspiracy theory anymore. But >if there's something in the works, why would Slick announce the SS cure? >Perhaps to lull the nation into a false sense of security? To short circuit >preparedness plans? Does that sound paranoid? Maybe, but don't forget that Mr. >Bill has made paranoia fashionable. > >Jim Some facts: The SSA has been working to remediate their systems since 1989. The other Fed agencies did not start until 1995. It is very interesting that in the past, the Administration has claimed all other Agencies would be complaint by Dec. 31, 1998. When trying to understand the Clinton Administration, the only time they are forthcoming is by omission. Note there was no announcement that any other Agency was compliant. The SSA does not issue the checks. The checks come from Treasury. Treasury is not compliant. One of the most vocal group of citizens that the pols really pay attention to are the Seniors, especially when it comes to their SS checks. No doubt the White House has been getting a lot of fevered inquiries from the Seniors, demanding to know if Y2K will effect their SS checks. Are we seeing a poll driven photo op here? An aside: Notice Clinton said that SS checks would not be delayed "for one day". Why didn't he simply say that they would not be delayed, period? Does it mean that the checks will be delayed for more then one day? (Depends on what the word "is" "is"?) They claim they are "compliant" yet they have not fully tested. Testing is the difficult part. SSA interacts with approx 2000 other data base systems. If those systems are not compliant, then they can corrupt the whole SSA system. As of today, the SA does not know the status of those systems. It took them 9 years to remediate 30,000,000 lines of code. The SSA also relies on approx. 33,000,000 lines of code within State agencies. Those lines have not been remediated. Clinton has signed various E.O.'s giving himself martial law powers (when he declares an emergency). The Feds (FEMA and the military) are planning several "exercises" to practice for possible Y2K National / International "emergencies" in the first part of 1999. The state's National Guards have been coordinating with FEMA in case of a "National Emergency". For the past several years the military has been practicing "urban assaults" in many major US cities. Conspiracy? Of course not. Maybe they just know something that we don't. flw DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Y2K Overhype (Re: [CTRL] OEN 12/27/98)
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 12/28/98 11:38:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > This is the whole problem with this topic. One does not know what to > believe. > That is the whole point anyway. It seems to me that what can be > accomplished > with the "use" of such a thing is great. Consider the "apocalyptic" > maundering of the "fundies", as you say. Then consider the stoic silence of > the programmers. There could be panic by some, anticipating something > happening even though nothing will or does happen. This whole thing could > just be a prepared ruse in order to effect some societal change, banking as > the "controllers" would be on the panic of the misinformed and the "fundies" > who will be looking at 2000 as though it is the end. Do I hear the term > "martial law"? > Teo1000 > Yeah, who or what do you believe? If you listen to Gary North he sounds a little too apocalyptic, yet his supporting information seems plausible, at least to this layman. At the same time I've heard programers with nothing to lose or gain say that yes, Y2K is every bit as serious as it's being billed, and they knew it all the time. But guess what - today we hear that Social Security's Y2K bug has been fixed and that they are now in 100% compliance. Apparently it took 2800 people to pull that off (no time frame given) and they came in a full year ahead of the deadline. If this is true, it seems reasonable that everyone else, with a full year left, has a great opportunity to fix their problem too, or at least that is what I would infer, if the spokesman is to be believed. So who was that spokesman, that bearer of good tidings? You guessed it! So where does that leave us? Who and what are we to believe? As to the martial law theory, it's one that's been gaining momentum in conspiracy circles in recent months. And after everything that's come down since 1993, you don't dismiss out of hand ANY conspiracy theory anymore. But if there's something in the works, why would Slick announce the SS cure? Perhaps to lull the nation into a false sense of security? To short circuit preparedness plans? Does that sound paranoid? Maybe, but don't forget that Mr. Bill has made paranoia fashionable. Jim DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Y2K Overhype (Re: [CTRL] OEN 12/27/98)
-Caveat Lector- This is the whole problem with this topic. One does not know what to believe. That is the whole point anyway. It seems to me that what can be accomplished with the "use" of such a thing is great. Consider the "apocalyptic" maundering of the "fundies", as you say. Then consider the stoic silence of the programmers. There could be panic by some, anticipating something happening even though nothing will or does happen. This whole thing could just be a prepared ruse in order to effect some societal change, banking as the "controllers" would be on the panic of the misinformed and the "fundies" who will be looking at 2000 as though it is the end. Do I hear the term "martial law"? Teo1000 DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Y2K Overhype (Re: [CTRL] OEN 12/27/98)
-Caveat Lector- > Why do I have such a hard time finding a computer programmer that I know > that's even mildly concerned w/ Y2K? I've asked all my programmer friends > the following questions: 1) Are you the least bit worried about Y2K, and 2) > Are any of your colleagues worried about Y2K? The answer to both is always > no, though I don't know any fundie apocalyptic programmers with > predispositions towards this sort of panic. You don't know any programmers working full-time on y2k compliance? I understand there's a population of them doing that. I expect it to be exposed as a major con if y2k turns out to be nothing. kt DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Y2K Overhype (Re: [CTRL] OEN 12/27/98)
-Caveat Lector- >Other electronic equipment besides computers may also be vulnerable. So >engineers everywhere are clambering over pipes, behind walls and into >closets in a giant scavenger hunt for computer chips that control >factories, oil platforms, aircraft, traffic lights and building-security >systems. Why do I have such a hard time finding a computer programmer that I know that's even mildly concerned w/ Y2K? I've asked all my programmer friends the following questions: 1) Are you the least bit worried about Y2K, and 2) Are any of your colleagues worried about Y2K? The answer to both is always no, though I don't know any fundie apocalyptic programmers with predispositions towards this sort of panic. >Several potential Y2K problems have been discovered during simulations. >When Chrysler Corp. set the clocks on the electronic equipment at one of >its factories ahead to 2000, for example, the security system locked all >the doors. So, set the clocks back to 1980 and you have another 20 years to fix the problem. QED. I have a real problem w/ this sort of apocryphal story (which I've heard many many times, always with a different organization/corporation). It defies common sense. Furthermore, it goes against everything I know about industrial equipment. Very little industrial equipment and/or embedded systems have a realtime clock. What little does has to have a way of resetting the clock. Why? The batteries run down every 3-10 years, at which time on every powerup the clock resets to some set date around the time of the clock's development (usually in the early 1980's). Anyone w/ a PC that's more than a few years old has encountered this. So, if your equipment has a Y2K problem, reset to an earlier date, or go around and yank the batteries for a few seconds and your problem is solved for 20 years. Before which time the equipment will have depreciated and/or worn out and been replaced. Mainframes are a different problem, but corporations that use mainframes have the resources to fix the old code. PCs? Most programmers I know have known about Y2K since before they went to college. >The year 2000 problem raises vexing questions for consumers. Most home >appliances and cars should work fine, manufacturers say, though many >people will have to test and fix personal computers. I have a Mac that's been Y2K compliant since 1987, but I don't use Micro$oft products. The only reason they're not Y2K compliant is so they can sell you an upgrade. See how smart Bill Gates really is? Bastard. >Some alarmists scoff at the notion that such organizing will stave off >the societal breakdown they see coming from large-scale computer >failures. When profits are at risk, corporate types will find workarounds. People tend to be very creative when their ass is on the line. >Bankers are especially worried about possible major withdrawals. > >The Federal Reserve Board has already said it will set aside an extra >$50 billion of currency reserves at the end of 1999. > >"When we get down to 1999, the retail public is going to panic and want >cash, and we better have it for them," said David Iacino, head of the >year 2000 program at BankBoston. This is my biggest worry - a media hype crisis, not a computer-created one. There's a slim chance of some government power-grab under cover of a staged Y2K crisis, but my paranoia doesn't reach that far. Your mileage may vary. Of course, w/ the media's natural tendancy to accentuate the negative, it's hard to say whether this is the usual fear-mongering or a deliberate disinformation campaign. I'm leaning towards the former. Che DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
