Re: y2k bug urgent request -- If Microsoft Built Cars...
REH wrote: Meanwhile the French can't get along with the Brits, theIrish Catholics and Protestants have been fighting for 400 years The moment the world gets connected it will be germ warfare all over again. The Merry Minuet They're rioting in Africa They're starving in Spain There's hurricanes in Florida And Texas needs rain the Whole world is festering with unhappy souls The French hate the Germans, the Germans hate the Poles Italians hate Yugoslavs, South Africans hate the Dutch And I don't like Anybody very much. But we can be tranquil and thankful and proud For man's been endowed with a mushroom-shaped cloud And we know for certain that some lucky day Someone will set the spark off and we will all be blown away They're rioting in Africa There's strife in Iran What nature doesn't do to us Will be done by our fellow Man -- Sheldon Harnic, 1958 (?) This is no recipe for the future. Like Germany's Schmidt put it, "The market is filled with psychopaths!" So what do we call the silicone CEOs with the culture of college dropouts I did see Schmidt's remarks but this is one of my favorite hobby horses. Those CEOs, their gurus, mandarins and shills repeatedly tell us in the biz press that their corporations (and by extension, they, themselves) have no responsibilities or obligations other than growth and shareholder value. The canonical corporate personality that they promote matches up nearly point for point with the official clinical diagnostic criteria for a psychopath. - Mike -- Michael Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.mit.edu:8001/people/mspencer/home.html ---
Re: y2k bug urgent request
An interesting post Chris, I feel like the average driver who wants his "dictulena" car to get him to and from work while talking to a race car mechanic about his problems with General Motors. I believe it is General Motor's purpose to build a universe where their products are the simplest and works the best for their consumers. It doesn't concern them that Ford's parts don't work within their universe. Unfortunately for us, the computer universe is all connected in ways that no other industry has to be. As for Gates and Cato, I could see it coming on the bias of MSNBC news.Some of the scuzziest people in the country including racists, a genocidal psycho-path host and a man who could bring back the anti-Roman bias with his stereo-typical culture bound ideas. And then there is the Jewish Puerto Rican Libertarian who has a good heart but is personally confused. They got rid of the only artist they had. He was too tricky. I wish I was a composer, I could write some great works with these strange characters. If you want to read a couple of interesting articles check the Sunday NYTimes Books in Review.One article is called Performance Art and is on Emerson and the other is The First Squillion Years, a review of a book on cosmology. When they do it right the NYTimes is a good read and these two are that. Ray Christoph Reuss wrote: REH wrote: Most of the people that I talk to about this says much the same about Gates and Micro-soft. However, for the record I was not speaking of Gates only but the Libertarian Party cell that inhabits almost all of silicone valley. They fund anti community initiatives all over the country and one of their crew just did in fair minority hiring practices in California as "socialist." Generally they are followers of Ayn Rand ... Their scholar's think tank is funded by that nutty Koch family from Kansas and calls itself the Cato Institute which shows how the media will kiss any body part that smells of money. Yup. See http://cato.org/gatesvisit.html for a weird example of Gates whining about the bad bad Justice Dept. going after this poor innocent victim of a socialist conspiracy. On the other hand it could be just money and built in obsolescence. Something that has been done often in the past by big business selling individual products toconsumers. You've guessed it. So everyone will **have to** buy Windows2000. The concept is total dependence. M$ also isn't interested in "hyper individuality" on the user's part -- quite on the contrary, total "assimilation" to the "industry standard" (yeah, incompatible with itself) is the goal, with nobody but Gates calling the shots. You mean mass production which is the only productive way to go. No, I meant diversity and the degree of "customizability" of the software, which is very low in M$ products. M$ doesn't want creative users, but assimilated conformists. "Where do you want to go today?" is a rhetorical question: You can't go anywhere else, only where M$ will let you go. But you are confusing the dynamics of the net with the PC itself. My point is still that they have to inhabit the role of the "Trickster" with such a massive commune like entity as the Internet. It is literally vulnerable to anyone. That's why it's so important that users have bug-free and useful software so they know what they're doing/sending and don't mess up mailing lists with wrong-dated (by their insidious OS!) postings. The only way I can see the net working is if there is standardization of structure with individuation of the process. The "standardization of structure" already exists (W3C etc.), but unfortunately, M$ changes such standards (in the infamous "embrace and extend" style) and inserts bugs, messing up the whole structure (and process). Dennis Paull wrote: First, much of the Y2k difficulties will come from embedded microchips buried in products most of us don't think of as computers. Examples are traffic lights, medical and other scientific equipment and industrial control systems such as safety systems on refineries and power generators. ... But there is another, difficult problem, that of legacy systems running COBOL programs on main frames. Can't blame Big Bill for that either. I didn't blame Big Bill for either; "only" for the PC software problems that some listmembers are now experiencing. (Embedded microchips and COBOL mainframes aren't programmed by M$, so it couldn't mess these up too.) Chris "I think anybody who is savvy about this market knows that Microsoft is getting away with stuff it probably shouldn't get away with." -- GEOFFREY MOORE, Marketing Guru
Re: y2k bug urgent request -- If Microsoft Built Cars...
REH wrote: An interesting post Chris, I feel like the average driver who wants his "dictulena" car to get him to and from work while talking to a race car mechanic about his problems with General Motors. I have been talking all the time about the impact of M$ bugs on the *average* PC user and his daily work (and on the whole Economy), not about my problems with M$. (Since I'm living in a M$-free zone, my problems with M$ are not personal anyway..) Concerning your analogy, I can't resist forwarding "If Microsoft Built Cars" (below)... ;-) I believe it is General Motor's purpose to build a universe where their products are the simplest and works the best for their consumers. It doesn't concern them that Ford's parts don't work within their universe. Unfortunately for us, the computer universe is all connected in ways that no other industry has to be. Then again, the basic idea of the Internet was to enable *all* computers and OS's (from different manufacturers) to work together -- if they *adopt* the common standards, instead of "embraceextend"ing them in order to *hijack* (aka proprietarize) these standards... Greetings, Chris ___FWD___ If Microsoft Built Cars... == The Top 13 ways things would be different if Microsoft built cars: 1. A particular model year of car wouldn't be available until after that year, instead of before. 2. It would be completely acceptable to have new cars stop in the middle of a road for no apparent reason, forcing the driver to shut the car off, restart it, and continue driving. 3. The oil, alternator, gas, engine warning lights would be replaced with a single "General Car Fault" warning light. 4. People would get excited about the "new" features in Microsoft cars, forgetting completely that they had been available in other brands for years. 5. You would be constantly pressured to upgrade your car... Wait a second, it's that way now! 6. You would have to take driving lessons every year, because the traffic rules are changing regularly -- special traffic rules would apply to Microsoft cars. 7. You'd have to switch to Microsoft Gas(TM). 8. You could only have one person at a time in your car, unless you bought a car NT, but then you'd have to buy more seats. 9. New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt. 10. Sun Motorsystems would make a car that was solar powered, twice as reliable, 5 times as fast, but only ran on 5% of the roads. 11. The US government would be getting subsidies from an automaker, instead of giving them. 12. Car radio manufacturers would go out of business because Microsoft is putting a free third-rate radio in all its cars. Replacing it by a different brand radio would make the car stop even more frequently. 13. The airbag system would ask "Are you sure? (Yes/No/Cancel)" before going off. (Default: No)
Re: y2k bug urgent request -- If Microsoft Built Cars...
Christoph Reuss wrote: (snip) Then again, the basic idea of the Internet was to enable *all* computers and OS's (from different manufacturers) to work together -- if they *adopt* the common standards, instead of "embraceextend"ing them in order to *hijack* (aka proprietarize) these standards... Meanwhile the French can't get along with the Brits, theIrish Catholics and Protestants have been fighting for 400 years, the Spanish had a 700 year war with the Moors who taught them how to count (an early example of Freud's teacher/father hatred) The only true Internationalists, the Jews and the Gypsies are the despised of the West, the Jews still see Philistines when they talk to the Arabs and the Arabs are still trying to prove the superiority of their recently acquired brand of monotheism. Except the Bahais have usurped the "most recent" title and that makes them the scum of the earth to Islam. Then there are the Croatian Catholics and the Serbian Orthodox and the Bosnian and Albanian Moslems. And get this, they are all cousins. They look more alike than Cherokees and the Sioux! So tell me Chris, how can these folks even imagine linkage on an information Internet? The moment the world gets connected it will be germ warfare all over again. This is no recipe for the future.Like Germany's Schmidt put it, "The market is filled with psychopaths!"So what do we call the silicone CEOs with the culture of college dropouts?How about Idiot Savants? You forwarded: If Microsoft Built Cars... == The Top 13 ways things would be different if Microsoft built cars: 1. A particular model year of car wouldn't be available until after that year, instead of before. No they would put out the same model in a different skin, on time andat a higher price. 2. It would be completely acceptable to have new cars stop in the middle of a road for no apparent reason, forcing the driver to shut the car off, restart it, and continue driving. And they would require that everyone else wait until they couldplay again. 3. The oil, alternator, gas, engine warning lights would be replaced with a single "General Car Fault" warning light. Already done. I rent cars living in New York City. Whenwas the last time you saw an oil or heat gauge? 4. People would get excited about the "new" features in Microsoft cars, forgetting completely that they had been available in other brands for years. This is not new. This is the consumer society! They've been playing such a game for at least 100 years. Fake newness is the only way that modern manufacturing can guarantee productivity. The economists lie about creativity. It barely exists. True R D is too expensive to be profitable. The same crowd that used to lie about it on the left are now neo-s on the right. Their styles and even words are the same socialist realism crap. The only advantage is that they are no longer so involved with the schools. It was horrible when I went to school and they were the left wing. 5. You would be constantly pressured to upgrade your car... Wait a second, it's that way now! You're getting it now. 6. You would have to take driving lessons every year, because the traffic rules are changing regularly -- special traffic rules would apply to Microsoft cars. You couldn't do this with cars so they invented Y2K as acomputer version of "Chicken." The lives of the banal, involved in insignificance, too simple for the art of living, must become involved instead in the art of death. Eros and Thanatos. 7. You'd have to switch to Microsoft Gas(TM). You weren't around when the auto manufacturers lostthe right to choose their own fuel due to its extreme polluting properties. A section of my family was involved with Ford at the time and you should have heard them scream. They lost the potential to do what no. 7 describes and they realized the billions that it cost them. 8. You could only have one person at a time in your car, unless you bought a car NT, but then you'd have to buy more seats. This is what I call the hotrod mentality. Just another wayof making those of us who stupidly threw away our typewriters, and don't care "sh...t" about the new computers but just want to do the real work of the world, experience computer rage. 9. New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt. Already done. Chiropractors are making a fortune withtheir new car seats and the adjustments that go with them. 10. Sun Motorsystems would make a car that was solar powered, twice as reliable, 5 times as fast, but only ran on 5% of the roads. Are you talking about the Delorian? 11. The US government would be getting subsidies from an automaker, instead of giving them. I don't get this? 12. Car radio manufacturers would go out of business because
Re: y2k bug urgent request
REH wrote: Most of the people that I talk to about this says much the same about Gates and Micro-soft. However, for the record I was not speaking of Gates only but the Libertarian Party cell that inhabits almost all of silicone valley. They fund anti community initiatives all over the country and one of their crew just did in fair minority hiring practices in California as "socialist." Generally they are followers of Ayn Rand ... Their scholar's think tank is funded by that nutty Koch family from Kansas and calls itself the Cato Institute which shows how the media will kiss any body part that smells of money. Yup. See http://cato.org/gatesvisit.html for a weird example of Gates whining about the bad bad Justice Dept. going after this poor innocent victim of a socialist conspiracy. On the other hand it could be just money and built in obsolescence. Something that has been done often in the past by big business selling individual products toconsumers. You've guessed it. So everyone will **have to** buy Windows2000. The concept is total dependence. M$ also isn't interested in "hyper individuality" on the user's part -- quite on the contrary, total "assimilation" to the "industry standard" (yeah, incompatible with itself) is the goal, with nobody but Gates calling the shots. You mean mass production which is the only productive way to go. No, I meant diversity and the degree of "customizability" of the software, which is very low in M$ products. M$ doesn't want creative users, but assimilated conformists. "Where do you want to go today?" is a rhetorical question: You can't go anywhere else, only where M$ will let you go. But you are confusing the dynamics of the net with the PC itself. My point is still that they have to inhabit the role of the "Trickster" with such a massive commune like entity as the Internet. It is literally vulnerable to anyone. That's why it's so important that users have bug-free and useful software so they know what they're doing/sending and don't mess up mailing lists with wrong-dated (by their insidious OS!) postings. The only way I can see the net working is if there is standardization of structure with individuation of the process. The "standardization of structure" already exists (W3C etc.), but unfortunately, M$ changes such standards (in the infamous "embrace and extend" style) and inserts bugs, messing up the whole structure (and process). Dennis Paull wrote: First, much of the Y2k difficulties will come from embedded microchips buried in products most of us don't think of as computers. Examples are traffic lights, medical and other scientific equipment and industrial control systems such as safety systems on refineries and power generators. ... But there is another, difficult problem, that of legacy systems running COBOL programs on main frames. Can't blame Big Bill for that either. I didn't blame Big Bill for either; "only" for the PC software problems that some listmembers are now experiencing. (Embedded microchips and COBOL mainframes aren't programmed by M$, so it couldn't mess these up too.) Chris "I think anybody who is savvy about this market knows that Microsoft is getting away with stuff it probably shouldn't get away with." -- GEOFFREY MOORE, Marketing Guru
Re: y2k bug urgent request
REH wrote: We all notice the immense contradiction between people greedily taking everything they can, declaring that everyone is only responsible to themselves while building an internet of sites where the "butterfly effect" is more the rule than their hyper individuality. For the record: The Internet wasn't built by Gates and his Y2K-bug gang (just as little as it was invented by Al Gore..) -- in fact, M$ "slept" over the Internet for years and then copied the technology developed by Netscape et al. Let's state this clearly: The Y2K problems which various members of this list are now experiencing are due to the Micro$oft dumbware they are using. They're not using mainframes from the 1970ies, they are using PCs with OSs from the 1990ies, but unfortunately, Gates has "migrated" the Y2K bug to the PC, ALTHOUGH there would have been plenty of storage space and upgrade changes to work with "complete" date formats -- as the MacOS did from the start. M$ also isn't interested in "hyper individuality" on the user's part -- quite on the contrary, total "assimilation" to the "industry standard" (yeah, incompatible with itself) is the goal, with nobody but Gates calling the shots. Dump the M$ crap and get yourself REAL software! Chris ___ "640K [of RAM] ought to be enough for anybody." -- BILL GATES, 1981 [just like 8 characters for filenames...]
Re: y2k bug urgent request
Christoph Reuss wrote: REH wrote: We all notice the immense contradiction between people greedily taking everything they can, declaring that everyone is only responsible to themselves while building an internet of sites where the "butterfly effect" is more the rule than their hyper individuality. For the record: The Internet wasn't built by Gates and his Y2K-bug gang (just as little as it was invented by Al Gore..) -- in fact, M$ "slept" over the Internet for years and then copied the technology developed by Netscape et al. Let's state this clearly: The Y2K problems which various members of this list are now experiencing are due to the Micro$oft dumbware they are using. Hi Chris, Most of the people that I talk to about this says much the same about Gates and Micro-soft. However, for the record I was not speaking of Gates only but the Libertarian Party cell that inhabits almost all of silicone valley. They fund anti community initiatives all over the country and one of their crew just did in fair minority hiring practices in California as "socialist." Generally they are followers of Ayn Rand and follow the new term of "Dynamists" as opposed to the rest of us which they have coined "Stasists".Actually their history is confused and their philosophy is a mongrel mix of romantic and classical 19th century artistic cultural styles. The mix shows that they understand neither. I suspect that the mix of digital mechanics that they use in programming really is what they say, an ignorant mistake based upon a two dimensional view of the world. Their scholar's think tank is funded by that nutty Koch family from Kansas and calls itself the Cato Institute which shows how the media will kiss any body part that smells of money. The Internet was the government's invention based upon a need for scientists to communicate, or so the myth goes. I suspect that they all had something to do with it, Al Gore, Gates, the Army Band and all of the other connected folks. My point was how they are rabidly anti community (Gore excepted) in their politics and how that would make them truly awful when trying to work from network integrated systems when they don't believe in them. The key word is "believe."I would call this a giant double bind for such conflicted folks. They're not using mainframes from the 1970ies, they are using PCs with OSs from the 1990ies, but unfortunately, Gates has "migrated" the Y2K bug to the PC, ALTHOUGH there would have been plenty of storage space and upgrade changes to work with "complete" date formats -- as the MacOS did from the start. On the other hand it could be just money and built in obsolescence. Something that has been done often in the past by big business selling individual products toconsumers. The PC is a lot cheaper than an automobile. M$ also isn't interested in "hyper individuality" on the user's part -- quite on the contrary, total "assimilation" to the "industry standard" (yeah, incompatible with itself) is the goal, with nobody but Gates calling the shots. You mean mass production which is the only productive way togo. But you are confusing the dynamics of the net with the PC itself. My point is still that they have to inhabit the role of the "Trickster" with such a massive commune like entity as the Internet. It is literally vulnerable to anyone. Imagine what it would be like for everyone to be able to change the traffic lights in New York's traffic grid simply by running the clock forward on their car and you get the linkage problem. The only way I can see the net working is if there is standardization of structure with individuation of the process.Those who still think like process when they are responsible for structure are like someone walking into another linguistic culture and speaking only their own language while demanding that the others grow up and speak his language which doesn't fit their culture or personal lives. Dump the M$ crap and get yourself REAL software! Chris This all reminds me of the Cherokee word for automobile, obviously of recent invention. It is dicktulena. If you say the word enough you will get the image of some drunk dick driving down a two lane road, which means to us "watch out!" I'm sure we could come up with some comparable word for this beast. REH ___ "640K [of RAM] ought to be enough for anybody." -- BILL GATES, 1981 [just like 8 characters for filenames...]
Re: y2k bug urgent request
-- Hi Ray, Chris, et al, I am a twenty seven year resident of Sillycon Valley and one of those technologists responsible for the Y2K problems. Please don't suggest that all SV residents are followers of those vocal Libertarians that seem to have become the spokespersons of many of the high tech folks here. Some of us (a few at least) are futurework types. First, much of the Y2k difficulties will come from embedded microchips buried in products most of us don't think of as computers. Examples are traffic lights, medical and other scientific equipment and industrial control systems such as safety systems on refineries and power generators. The reason that these systems are more likely to go bad is that, in many cases, there is no way to "fix" them short of replacement. But there is another, difficult problem, that of legacy systems running COBOL programs on main frames. Can't blame Big Bill for that either. Most major computer systems will probably fair pretty well. The ones that scare me are the computers in shops and factories that have no one who understands them available in-house. This includes many smaller companies in this country and even more in countries with a less well developed software industry and less resources to effect a fix. Not to let Gates off the hook. His company produces some of the most bloated, inefficient programs around and so should have found a way to avoid the Y2K problem long ago. They did copy so much of Apple's user interface, they could have looked a little deeper for additional guidance. In my case, if any of my software is Y2K buggy, it was not intentional. It was simply not paying attention. Usually this was because I could not believe that code I wrote in the '80s would still be around in '99 and later. Of course it would have been nice if the product specs I worked to had said to assure Y2K compatibility, but my customers didn't have that foresight either. So there is a lot of blame to spread around. dennis Christoph Reuss wrote: REH wrote: We all notice the immense contradiction between people greedily taking everything they can, declaring that everyone is only responsible to themselves while building an internet of sites where the "butterfly effect" is more the rule than their hyper individuality. For the record: The Internet wasn't built by Gates and his Y2K-bug gang (just as little as it was invented by Al Gore..) -- in fact, M$ "slept" over the Internet for years and then copied the technology developed by Netscape et al. Let's state this clearly: The Y2K problems which various members of this list are now experiencing are due to the Micro$oft dumbware they are using. Hi Chris, [snip] They're not using mainframes from the 1970ies, they are using PCs with OSs from the 1990ies, but unfortunately, Gates has "migrated" the Y2K bug to the PC, ALTHOUGH there would have been plenty of storage space and upgrade changes to work with "complete" date formats -- as the MacOS did from the start. On the other hand it could be just money and built in obsolescence. Something that has been done often in the past by big business selling individual products toconsumers. The PC is a lot cheaper than an automobile. [snip] REH ___ "640K [of RAM] ought to be enough for anybody." -- BILL GATES, 1981 [just like 8 characters for filenames...]
y2k bug urgent request
Could it be, that the mails on future-work with wrong dates are disturbing my mail system? I am working with Netscape 3.0 under Windows 3.11. When loadinng down the wrongdated mails Netscape crashed. So I had to uninstall and install Netscape twice. Now I have removed all the mails from the last two month. Netscape seems to work again. What is going on? Are we - is anyone - testing the y2k bug? Could you please tell me how to handle the problem. With best wishes, Robert Neunteufel
Re: y2k bug urgent request
Robert, I'm sure there are many people testing their machines. What I am doing now is to be sure that my clock registers the correct time and date, no matter what, if I am sending an e-mail. Like any disease, finding the beginning of it is interesting but not much practical use other than as a lesson. Being connected to each other is a very difficult problem for people on many levels. It has to do with what stops the negotiations on futures situations, like Ed's dealing with the indigenous peoples, and it has to do with the extreme libertarian positions of people in silicone valley who should know better. We all notice the immense contradiction between people greedily taking everything they can, declaring that everyone is only responsible to themselves while building an internet of sites where the "butterfly effect" is more the rule than their hyper individuality. From the impotent cry of the virus maker to the businessman (or woman) trying to adjust their world to the new information reality while swimming in a sea of sharks, we all are extremely vulnerable to each other's welfare. It is no less so as we listen to the government committee that is supposed to arrive at solutions to this rapidly growing, out of control organism careening towards a creator imposed wall set to hit on the millennium. Does anyone ask why the inventors imposed such a limit? Well, yes, but when you do you just get the "aw shucks we're just human and incompetent" explanation. The same people who advocate the negation of all regulations and the incorporation of contracts enforceable only by the most wealthy as the "wave of the future." Who will make business on the illness of computers? This medical model is currently at work in the HMOs in the U.S. and proves that you are only healthy of you can afford a wife to do your home corporation or if you do so little in your business that you can do it yourself or if medicine or computers IS your business, or if you have a major educational institution conning their students into supporting your "research" as long as it is published. Like that great Amateur Charles Ives said before the first great crash of the 20th century. "If you want to do it right then it has to be something other than your job." Ives followed his own advice as he made millions and shaped the Insurance Industry in the 20th century. At night he wrote music at a furious pace, tossing the pages over his shoulder to land in a heap on the floor. In the morning his wife Melody would dutifully gather up the leaves, (kind of like the tons of e-mail that we now write) and place them in a cabinet never to be opened until Ives death and his biographers Braunstien and Smith tried to put the unnumbered pages in order. Ives had a heart attack, from the pace, in his forties at which point he only did insurance until his death in his eighties. He once heard a bit of Bernstein's performance of his second symphony at which point the ringing in his ears drove him away from the radio. His only comment was "It sounded like I thought" and America's only great composer died in a fit of forty year's rage rather than creativity. He knew the logical positivists and he knew intimately the sell out that the artists made to the rich giving up their connection to the "masses" that contained the wisdom that was dribbling away during his day. The same baronic rich, who needed the classical artists to validate their faked aristocracy today, continue their "hero's journey" in silicone valley led by people who wouldn't have a musical thought if it hit them in the face. As they earned their cultural validation with cash, they gave up any type of learning that doing the real thing might bring. It is said that music can kill cancer, in a new book by an MD from New York Hospital. No doubt it should be locked away lest this cancer be healed and the silicone gang lose their key to our pocketbooks. REH Neunteufel Robert wrote: Could it be, that the mails on future-work with wrong dates are disturbing my mail system? I am working with Netscape 3.0 under Windows 3.11. When loadinng down the wrongdated mails Netscape crashed. So I had to uninstall and install Netscape twice. Now I have removed all the mails from the last two month. Netscape seems to work again. What is going on? Are we - is anyone - testing the y2k bug? Could you please tell me how to handle the problem. With best wishes, Robert Neunteufel
