Regarding all this stuff we've been seeing all over about
the Y2K problem:
a good deal of it arises because reporters and editors
misunderstand what they are told by the people they
interview to obtain information. These misunderstandings
arise because reporters--like the rest of us--can be stupid
and lazy at times. Another contributing cause is that
media folk tend to be technophobes who are always looking
for the dark side of any story involving technology.
One good example can be found in the TIME Magazine stories
that appeared about Y2K problems around 1/16/99. The main
story quoted a number of individuals who were concerned
about or making preparations for Y2K problems. The
overwhelming majority of the folks interviewed were
Southern, rural, and/or fundamentalist Christians--a
phenomenon the reporter failed to notice. In a second
story about "how it all came to be", the reporter badly
garbled some information he'd been given. (Interested
parties: go back and read that stuff; pay particular
attention to the nonsense the reporter writes about the
"picture clause" in Cobol!)
Another good example is the stuff that's appeared more
recently regarding 9/9/99. Some reporters have said
something like "some programmers used nines to end their
programs". As a former programmer I understand what the
reporter is trying to say--but do you think they
understand, or that John Q. Public will understand?
The bottom line is, don't pay too much attention to the
nonsense you hear in the media. If you want more accurate
information, find a programmer (preferably an older
programmer who worked on mainframes years ago) and ask that
person.
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
