>
> Strangely enough, it's pertinent as all get-out, just not for the
> reasons you espouse. If we succeed in the next year with some of the
> things we seek here on Keelynet, we might just avert a global
> catastrophe
> that Y2K will not be the cause, but the catalyst- and not in the way
> you've been lead to believe.
actually... it has been my thought that Y2K will be just what you described...
a 'trigger' of a kind. I just didnt want to state that for fear of offending
the resident Keely deities with conspiracy theories. <g>
> This implys that the systems that comprise the Internet will have a Y2K
> issue. As a person that's been using the Connected Internet (the
> "proper"
> name for the Internet) I can safely say that unless the phone grid gets
> shut down out of stupidity or the power grid gets shut down for the same
> reasons- that Y2K will come to pass and everything will still be there.
Frank, I'm aware that UNIX boxes are set for 2038 and that they comprise
the majority of net notes, servers, etc... my concern was regarding the PLC's
et al. If these go...well, UNIX Y2K compliancy won't help.
> The chips issue is nowhere as bad as the pundits for Y2K claim it is.
well, the question is...which pundits do you believe? The ones that are in
our industry trying to calm everyone down and make a ton of money off stirring
the pot of fear just enough to make people pay or the frothing at the mouth
militant survivalist who sees conspiracies everywhere? Personally I have little
faith inthe claims of either. Reasonable self reliancy IMHO is never a bad thing.
> The reality is this- almost all embedded systems do not care from adam
> what day of the week or month it is, let alone what year it is. Anyone
> that claims to the otherwise is trying to sell you something- period.
which reality would that be Frank? to my limited, inferior knowledge, I was under
the general understanding that when it came to programmable logic controllers
there was hardly any sort of glaobal standard in place for operation or design.
At least for many of the now aged plc's that were fab'd and implemented between
the 70's and mid 80's? Who knows what conventions are used in each situation
in places such as Eastern Europe. Any one who claims to have 100% solid
knowledge about all the different protocols and date related functions that
are set in place IMHO is either a con man or a fool. Why else would organizations
like the Aussie govt be sweating so much publicly JUST to get essential services
in place?
> These systems go off of how many seconds, minutes, or hours have passed
> since the last event- or at most what time of the day it is. Systems
> that schedule self-tests normally don't go off based on the time of the
> year, but rather how many days have elapsed since the last self-test was
> ran, etc.
well heres the thing... you say don't 'normally' go off. even if we happened to
have lucked out and the whole world had decided 15 to 20 years ago that they were all
going to more or less use the same design specs for plc's (which I am convinced
pretty much, this was not the case), and if there was only a very small fraction
of these devices that WERE sensitive to a year date and some of them happened to be
used in critical places susch as plants, factories, utilities.... you'd only
need a few small ones going screwy to cause one big monstrous effect.
> > think about the loop back self running diag and main. tests that
> > PLC's perform or have performed on them. You get a large clustering
> > of nodes on an industrial WAN that regulate power distribution...
> > well you only need a critical number of these to get 'stuck' in their
> > 'overdue' servicing flag to have the whole grid jeopardized.
>
> Read the above comment again. Simply put, this will not happen. As
> I've
> told others, if the grid is shut down, it'll be because the company in
> your area was stupid (in various forms) or something more sinister is
> going
> down.
you obviously have MUCH more faith in the intelligence of companies and computer
professionals. I have never know any dev group to be able to get to a prod
release date under budget and according to spec without having some major bugs
shake loose. The standard thing I've seen is a systems/programmer guy or
team promise the moon to save his butt or get a client and then end up being
hideously late in delivering and having to scale way back on what he had promised
in the first place. I have more faith in the stupidity of experts than in their
intelligence. As for plc's, from what I understand many of them ARE year dependent
since their service cycles check against the date in some cases to flag for system
replacement or component replacement. IF your point is that many of the recently made
plc's are strictly minute / hourly logged...sure I'd agree. But old ones, from what
I understand were prone to all kinds of failure based on year slot averages. A good
case in point is power supply replacement. I could be wrong about all this. While
I have been exposed to plc's and have even done some moderate work with plc fab firms
and have studied certain models / functions and worked with some engineers... I do not
pretend to know lots about them... I know very little in fact. So anyone out there
who could profile which SPECIFIC plc model types that are currently in place on the grid
and could SHOW me data sheets that clearly indicated no year date dependency...then I would be happy.
> Citicorp supposedly has their "critical" software corrected.
right, and when they say 'supposedly' we are supposed to stick our thumbs back
in our mouths and go wandering in our pajamas back to bed cos daddy says everythings
ok. Sorry, I don't buy it. You get a letter from Citicorp stating that they
are 100% compliant in their critical code as you mentioned it above and then lets talk again.
>The governments are the ones
> that
> you need to worry about- they're going to be screwed up pretty bad by
> this, and
> possibly by the middle of next year (Start of Fiscal Year 2000...). The
> situation
> IS bad- but not as bad as the pundits are making it out to be. The real
> risk
> from Y2K is not the software failures, but rather from the mass hysteria
> world-wide
> that was whipped up by all the wives-tales about Y2K that the pundits
> keep spreading.
>
> Mass hysteria such that we have a run on the banks and stock markets.
> Mass hysteria such that we have rioting.
agreed about the govt. and mass hysteria. My point is that mass hysteria
occurs because people are NOT self reliant and they know it. I'm also concerned
that entities like Keelynet may no longer be available to everyone if grid
sections go down.
>It'll be
> because stupid
> companies that are so afraid that the power plant's going to "blow up"
> that they
> shut down the system.
stupid companies abound everywhere. most firms are run at the top from patronage
not competence. I know. I recently worked for one of the largest firms in America,
a fortune 500 company thats run by a very wealthy family. I have seen first hand...
the crap that goes down. I was allowed into some fairly high level meetings with TOP
people involved with global IT operations. IF anything, I am convinced they are so far behind
Y2K compliancy and have no idea how bad off they are...well...it wont be pretty. But then
next to their other screw ups that were literally 'criminal' well.... it made Y2K look like a cake
walk. The hilarious thing is that the main guy in this 'family' is heralded across the country
as a visionary, american cowboy hero, rah rah sis boom bah entrepreneurial wizard in control of
his destiny and a boon to society and american apple pie yadayada... from what I saw behind the scenes
this guy seemed like simply a crook with no sense of ethics. But then look at how well crooks lie,
like Clinton for instance?
> It'll be from people rioting and looting in the
> streets
yup... it'll be from the ones who never took the time to think for themselves
and just relied on what 'daddy' said.
>We need to quit telling Y2K fairy tales and get to
> the _REAL_
> meat of the matter and start telling the _REAL_ truths every chance we
> get to
> every person that will listen.
Right, and Frank... I'm more than willing to acknowledge that your particular
brand of the truth is one I should buy into.... all I ask is that you offer
some sort of hard evidence that says there's nothing substantial to worry about.
Fairy tales go both ways.... they are either stories of monsters or of princes
and princesses and fluffy wuffy bunnies and happily ever after ending tales.
But they are both still 'fairy tales'.
>
> --
> Frank Earl
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> To leave this list, email <listserver@dallastexas.net>
> with the body text: leave keelynet
> WWW based join and leave forms and KeelyNet list archives
> are at http://dallastexas.net/keelynet/
> -------------------------------------------------------------
-- It is my opinion that we are being manipulated into a belief system which is reaching a critical point. Someone wants us to think a certain way, and things are being set up so we will follow that perception. It does not follow that the perception reflects the truth. It does not follow that the perception reflects the truth.-- Richard Hoagland
---------------------------------------------------------------------Don J. S. AdamsManaging ConsultantMicrosoftMain Campus, Bldg 1Redmond, WAUSA
425-882-3431 USA403-998-4066 Canada