SNET: United Nations plans SWAT team training to "control" citizens in Y2K crash

From: USCMike1@aol.com
Subject: SNET: United Nations plans SWAT team training to "control" citizens in Y2K crash
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 15:34:16 EST
To: KatieSouix@aol.com


->  SNETNEWS  Mailing List

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--part0_914877258_boundary
Content-ID: <0_914877258@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII


--part0_914877258_boundary
Content-ID: <0_914877258@inet_out.mail.netdoor.com.2>
Content-type: message/rfc822
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline

Return-Path: <kepi@netdoor.com>
Received: from  rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (rly-zd05.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.229]) by
	air-zc01.mail.aol.com (v53.20) with SMTP; Sun, 13 Dec 1998 23:22:22
	1900
Received: from netdoor.com (netdoor.com [208.137.128.6])
	  by rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
	  with ESMTP id XAA17219;
	  Sun, 13 Dec 1998 23:22:12 -0500 (EST)
Received: from kepi (port201.hat.netdoor.com [208.137.155.201])
	by netdoor.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id WAA26607;
	Sun, 13 Dec 1998 22:21:38 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981213222221.008aa4b0@mail.netdoor.com>
X-Sender: kepi@mail.netdoor.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 22:22:21 -0600
To: Kepi <kepi@netdoor.com>
From: Kepi <kepi@netdoor.com>
Subject: Nations at UN conference suggest SWAT teams to handle Y2K
  crises
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

Source: Star-Telegram.Com
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/doc/1047/1:COMP73/1:COMP73121298.html


Updated: Saturday, Dec. 12, 1998 at 17:58 CST 

Nations at UN conference suggest SWAT teams to handle Y2K crises

By Leslie J. Nicholson
Knight Ridder Newspapers

NEW YORK -- In a stark demonstration of the global scale of the Year 2000
computer problem, representatives of 130 nations gathered at the United
Nations Friday to hammer out plans for dealing with Y2K. 

The ideas included setting up national and international "SWAT teams" to
handle crises caused by the computer glitch.

The U.N. conference marked the first such gathering of Y2K coordinators
from several nations, including many developing countries that lag far
behind the United States in remediation efforts.

Y2K refers to a programming glitch that will cause some computers, softwar=
e
programs and microprocessors to interpret the abbreviated date 00 as 1900
rather than 2000. The result could be incorrect data processing and
equipment malfunctions.

"We all know that we are competing in a race against time," said Pakistani
ambassador Ahmad Kamal, who hosted the conference. "Despite all the effort=
s
and committed work of individuals and institutions, we are far from the
objective of ensuring Y2K compliance by the inflexible deadline of Dec. 31=
,
1999."

Fixing Y2K problems is a daunting task that involves rewriting computer
codes and potentially replacing billions of microchips.

U.N. Undersecretary-general Joseph E. Connor called Y2K the largest
computer project in the 50-year history of the information-technology
industry, but said predicting its effects accurately was impossible. He
said the global cost of fixing Y2K problems could reach as high as $600
billion with an additional $1.4 trillion going for litigation.

"There's no way to draw on past experience and predict what is going to
fail and what consequences these failures will have," Connor said. "All we
know for sure is the timing."

He said nations should attack Y2K on two fronts: by deciding which systems
are critical and fixing them first, and by developing contingency plans fo=
r
coping with computer failures.

"We have to get used to the fact that some systems and facilities will not
be addressed," Connor said.

Delegates spent most of the day in closed-door sessions to discuss Y2K
problems affecting specific industries and regions and released few detail=
s
of those meetings. One goal was to organize on a regional basis, including
implementing the SWAT-team idea. Kamal told reporters that such teams woul=
d
help nations deal with problems that cross borders, such as regional power
grid failures.

"You cannot stop at the political border of a country," he said.

Distributed by The Associated Press (AP) 

=A9 1998 Star-Telegram

###

=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=
=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9

**COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,
any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without
profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receivin=
g
the included information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only.  [ Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ]

=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=
=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9~=A9


--part0_914877258_boundary--

-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
->  Posted by: USCMike1@aol.com

Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
> 
> From: USCMike1@aol.com


> 
> NEW YORK -- In a stark demonstration of the global scale of the Year 2000
> computer problem, representatives of 130 nations gathered at the United
> Nations Friday to hammer out plans for dealing with Y2K.
> 
> The ideas included setting up national and international "SWAT teams" to
> handle crises caused by the computer glitch.
> 
> The U.N. conference marked the first such gathering of Y2K coordinators
> from several nations, including many developing countries that lag far
> behind the United States in remediation efforts.
> 
> Y2K refers to a programming glitch that will cause some computers, softwar=
> e
> programs and microprocessors to interpret the abbreviated date 00 as 1900
> rather than 2000. The result could be incorrect data processing and
> equipment malfunctions.

Is is (approximately) known how many percent of the owners of computer
systems have ever tried with some test cases to find out whether
their hardware/software could be susceptible to the Y2K problem?
I guess such tests would deliver some confidence intervals of
whether the problem could actually arise at 2000.

M. K. Shen

At 10:15 AM 12/29/98 +0100, Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
--snip of magnanimous import--
>
>Is is (approximately) known how many percent of the owners of computer
>systems have ever tried with some test cases to find out whether
>their hardware/software could be susceptible to the Y2K problem?
>I guess such tests would deliver some confidence intervals of
>whether the problem could actually arise at 2000.
>

What, you trying to downplay the tumult and ? that y2k will cause??? the
fearmongerers will not be happy with you. They want everyone to be begging
them for mercy, safety, deliverance from the y2k bug. 

What? you say consumers should actually test their own shit? You forgot to
mention the outside consultants who should be brought in at xyz dollars per
hour. To think that Joel and Janice Consumer might actually be able to test
their own equipment for y2k compliance. 

y2k is coming, or else!!! (read, it will be manufactured if it does not
eventualize itself).

Reeza! 
============================================================================
DH Key available upon request.


The affairs of Men rarely rely on the dictates of logic, or even common sense.


	"Yeah, they mostly rely on something below the belt."

				-- my older sister

Reeza! wrote:
> 
> At 10:15 AM 12/29/98 +0100, Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
> --snip of magnanimous import--
> >
> >Is is (approximately) known how many percent of the owners of computer
> >systems have ever tried with some test cases to find out whether
> >their hardware/software could be susceptible to the Y2K problem?
> >I guess such tests would deliver some confidence intervals of
> >whether the problem could actually arise at 2000.
> >
> 
> What, you trying to downplay the tumult and ? that y2k will cause??? the
> fearmongerers will not be happy with you. They want everyone to be begging
> them for mercy, safety, deliverance from the y2k bug.
> 
> What? you say consumers should actually test their own shit? You forgot to
> mention the outside consultants who should be brought in at xyz dollars per
> hour. To think that Joel and Janice Consumer might actually be able to test
> their own equipment for y2k compliance.
> 
> y2k is coming, or else!!! (read, it will be manufactured if it does not
> eventualize itself).

In WHICH word I wrote I was downplaying???  I think you are up-playing!
Are you a consultant, desiring to earn money? If not, then try
to keep discussion to real matters of the problem.

M. K. Shen

At 04:54 PM 12/29/98 +0100, Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
>
>In WHICH word I wrote I was downplaying???  I think you are up-playing!
>Are you a consultant, desiring to earn money? If not, then try
>to keep discussion to real matters of the problem.
>

Sorry, yes I am up-playing, for the sake of humor. No, I'm not a
consultant, Yes I desire to earn money, and the real problem (as I see it)
isn't with the hardware or software, it is with what people will do.
Regardless of anything relevant or irrelevant, what the sheeple think can
happen, what they see happen, what really does happen and how some of them
will over-react to it. 

All the Gov't's making plans for martial law is an enormous alarm going off
in my head,,,,

Reeza!
============================================================================
The affairs of Men rarely rely on the dictates of logic, or even common sense.

	"Yeah, they mostly rely on something below the belt."

				-- my older sister

	"Shhhhh. You're flooding my inbox with crap. How about giving it 
	a rest for a bit? I know you're probably bored wherever you are, 
	but please."
				-- krys

Reeza! wrote:

> Sorry, yes I am up-playing, for the sake of humor. No, I'm not a
> consultant, Yes I desire to earn money, and the real problem (as I see it)
> isn't with the hardware or software, it is with what people will do.
> Regardless of anything relevant or irrelevant, what the sheeple think can
> happen, what they see happen, what really does happen and how some of them
> will over-react to it.
> 
> All the Gov't's making plans for martial law is an enormous alarm going off
> in my head,,,,

What I guess is very bad currently is that plenty of owners of the 
computer systems appear to be shy of facing squarely with the
problem and of conducting some direct tests to get at least some
real feeling of the problem that quite probably may occur. (It's
like one is not inclined to consult the doctors until the illness
becomes very grave. Certainly this is only my superficial observation. 
I may be very wrong.) Of course, such tests, if not well designed, 
may not deliver the hoped-for results. But having the courage to do 
some tests is anyway better than to avoid considering the problem 
till the day when Y2K really hurts. I am ignorant of how hard it 
is indeed to devise some realistic tests for Y2K. On the other hand, 
I can't imagine that these could be anything terribly difficult. 
If there are huge data bases involved, one could copy a part to a 
separate hardware and do experiments with it by entering data of 
Y2K and manipulating the system clock. If nothing happens, then 
one gains at least some assurance and can proceed to do more 
sophisticated tests. If something goes wrong, one knows directly 
what kind of misery one could expect to have at 2000 if the problem 
is ignored today and can thus energetically look for the remedy.
I speculate that most firms can start to do some tests with their
own staffs, i.e. without external consultants.

M. K. Shen

Reeza! wrote:

> Sorry, yes I am up-playing, for the sake of humor. No, I'm not a
> consultant, Yes I desire to earn money, and the real problem (as I see it)
> isn't with the hardware or software, it is with what people will do.
> Regardless of anything relevant or irrelevant, what the sheeple think can
> happen, what they see happen, what really does happen and how some of them
> will over-react to it.


aside from the humor (which I agree on) you might be right. someone said
not too long ago that the real y2k problem is in the people's mind. test
yourself: born in the summer of '68, the 70s, sign with name and date:
28.12.98 <signature>. people THINK two numbers, which might be the real
reason so much software is written using two bytes.