From: Michael Lorrey (retroman@together.net)
Date: Mon Jun 08 1998 - 16:14:59 MDT
Alexander 'Sasha' Chislenko wrote:
> "The Army's Year 2000 program could fail because of management
> problems, an incomplete test plan and other reasons, according
> to a General Accounting Office report released last week."
>
> More at http://www.fcw.com/ref/hottopics/y2k.htm
>
> So much about the better ability of a centralized planning system
> to look ahead.
>
> I wonder what the consequences for the US military standing may
> be. Probably just some embarrassment and loss of respect/fear
> from potential enemies - nothing that can't be fixed by intense
> politicking and extra few hundred giga$ in defense spending -
> the ability to profit from its mistakes does look like a
> special skill of the State.
Considering that much of the Army thinking/mindset is still oriented toward
cavalry/infantry/artillery, that is retained from the 19th century, I'd expect
that they wouldn't have any serious y2k problems till at least 2100.....;)
All of our nations strategic nuke capability is in both the USAF or the Navy's
hands, so even if one of those is not prepared (I don't know about the navy, I
do know that the USAF has been well prepared) the other should be able to handle
the load....
Seriously, most military systems do not depend upon actual clocks that measure a
two digit year as is the problem with much COBOL programming. They typically use
simple counting circuits or programs that can be reset without loss of
capability.
-- TANSTAAFL!!! Michael Lorrey ------------------------------------------------------------ mailto:retroman@together.net Inventor of the Lorrey Drive MikeySoft: Graphic Design/Animation/Publishing/Engineering ------------------------------------------------------------ How many fnords did you see before breakfast today?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:10 MST