|
Y2k analysis: how to read a y2k article
"The truth is...no one really knows for sure. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best, and weigh the risk of preparation with the risk of non-preparation?"
---George Grindley (State Rep. District 35 Marietta, Georgia)
Watch for the weasel words, see how officials shift the categories and the target dates.
One parent we know remembers how hard it was to make that decision to lie to the little kids at various times. It had to be done, of course. "Mommy and Daddy will keep you safe from all harm. You'll live to be very old, and we're sure you'll have a happy life. Grandma's just not feeling well, of course she's not dying." You know the list of lies, if you are not a parent who has found they had to use some of them, you're still someone who once was a kid who heard some of those lies. It was always for the kid's own good -- and sometimes, yes it really was for the kid's own good to be lied to.
But Y2k is not one of those times when we can be assured that nothing will harm us as long as the nightlights are still burning. Do we get the truth? Who benefits when the truth is not being told?
Since when can the phrases "we don't know what will happen" and "it will only be like a three day storm" co-exist in the same sentence?
What companies are holding out information on their Y2k compliance, hoping that they can keep their shareholders in the dark?
Y2k remediation in many companies has not always been given to the best and the brightest, as the job has been seen as a dead-end track by those who don't understand the consequences. Some executives do not want to hear bad news. As David Eddy says, "'Don't tell me the truth...Tell me what I want to hear'" is the classic bureaucratic response to unwelcome realities. The worse the implications of any given problem, the greater the organizational resistance to hearing the message. Far easier to simply shoot the messenger."
Who has independently verified that what you are reading in Y2k compliance statements is the truth? It's virtually impossible to get sufficient information from an independent source to know if a company is lying or just plain ignorant about their status. These self-reported statements are like having the kids make up their own grades.
Many companies and institutions are not aiming at total compliance at this point. It's too late to fix everything for many firms, so they have had to triage. Do those who hold the positions that are not Mission Critical know what will happen to them and their jobs if the software is not functioning on January 1? If your employer is one of the 40% of American small or medium sized businesses (the backbone of our economy) that are waiting till Jan 1 to see what goes wrong, how long will your business last if it finds it has problems and no-one is available to fix it? Has your employer given you a written assurance that your job will be there even if the computers don't work properly?
Who is looking out for you? Who is looking out for your family's well-being? Whose word are you going to trust when your safety might depend on trusting the words of strangers? What steps can you take to be more self-reliant?
Read deeply, read widely, read the Y2k information available through these links as if your very life depended on it. If y2k is indeed the "bump in the road" forecast by some, the prudent and prepared person will be left with a pantry of food that they would eat anyway, and medicines that they will use during 2000. However, if our tightly interdependent society develops more serious Y2k disruptions, the prudent person will have prepared early and avoided panicking at the last moment.
As the old Sufi proverb says, "Trust in Allah -- but tie up your camel at night!"
-----Mountain Y2k
"How to detect Y2k spin"
http://www.y2knewswire.com/y2kspin.htm
" Seems like everyone is claiming they're Y2K-compliant without actually using those words. It's part of a linguistic erosion that's been happening in America for the last 20 years, it has become a way of saying nothing while appearing to convey meaning. First called, "doublespeak," the linguistic art of getting people to think you said one thing while you actually say something else has achieved a new level of unfortunate mastery. This, combined with the unquestioning acceptance of vague Y2K statements has led to a bizarre situation where all kinds of Y2K compliance claims are being made, but few of them mean anything. So how do you know when someone is actually saying something meaningful about their Y2K compliance status? Check the chart below. We're collecting all the Y2K fudges, fibs, misrepresentations and outright lies we can find?" --- excerpt from "How to Detect Y2k Spin.
Well worth reading.
"On Schedule? Perhaps It Depends On What Your Definition of 'On' Is"
http://y2ktimebomb.com/Computech/Issues/lcore9903.htm
Primer on reading SEC reports on Y2k progress, and learning to see how the information gets manipulated. If you own stocks, use this information to see how honest your company's reports have been. If companies are not going to make it by their stated deadlines, they have been known to quietly shift the deadlines further away.
"Fast and Loose: Y2K Coverage in the Media."
http://www.wbn.com/y2ktimebomb/Media/Articles/lcore9928.htm
E.L.Core's article for the Westergaard 2000 site on a couple of specific journalistic blunders that point out errors in media Y2k coverage.
"Don't Chase the Y2k Red Herrings"
http://www.wbn.com/y2ktimebomb/Media/lcore9915.htm
Essay on distractions that cloud the real Y2k issues, and the cliches that substitute for real thinking.
"Power industry claims seem scripted"
http://www.y2knewswire.com/19990701mm.htm
Are power company news releases being written from an industry-wide template?
Harris Miller on "Compliant" versus "Ready"
http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/5246
On the crucial differences between the words "Y2k-compliant" and "Y2k-ready." Read this, the nuances are important for your understanding.
"User beware -- Y2k compliance claims could be bogus."
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/y2k/s070199_y2k01_19.htm
Analysis of compliancy claims -- are they sometimes too good to be true? This article quotes some sources as showing major numbers of compliancy claims submitted to them to be false upon testing and independent verification.. " ?BellSouth Corp., for example, told state officials that more than half of the compliance claims by its vendors turned out to be incorrect when they were independently tested, he said..."
"The new official line on Y2K : Contingency planning is now seen as 'readiness.'"
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_franke/19990729_xcdfr_the_new_of.shtml
Once again, the goal posts are moved?
|
|
