Re: [CTRL] WHY 2K? - Clinton's 3rd term

2000-01-06 Thread Bill Kingsbury
-Caveat Lector- At 03:30 PM 1-4-2000 -0600, Mack White wrote: >The government didn't build those Y2K command posts for nothing. >Something may yet happen, further down the line--something as bad, >if not worse, than Y2K might have been. > >In less than 12 months, we will see the real turn-of-the

Re: [CTRL] WHY 2K?

2000-01-05 Thread Donald Park
-Caveat Lector- Way to go Nessie; ditto here! -- >From: nessie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [CTRL] WHY 2K? >Date: Tue, Jan 4, 2000, 8:40 PM > > -Caveat Lector- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED],Internet writes: >>The message it

Re: [CTRL] WHY 2K?

2000-01-04 Thread nessie
-Caveat Lector- [EMAIL PROTECTED],Internet writes: >The message it sent me was that it's good to have a spouse who's an expert >in martial arts and will help fight off and subdue one's potential >assassin >(as Mrs. Harrison is, and did)... > The message it sent me was that English gun laws su

Re: [CTRL] WHY 2K?

2000-01-04 Thread Ynr Chyldz Wyld
-Caveat Lector- From: "Mack White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Apparently, back in the early days of computers, this minor Y2K bug was > discovered. Someone took note of the fact and realized it might come in > useful later. So, in 1968, the National Bureau of Standards mandated the > six-digit sy

[CTRL] WHY 2K?

2000-01-04 Thread Mack White
-Caveat Lector- WHY 2K? by Mack White (NOTE: The following is pure speculation, and subject to change should new facts emerge.) We used to wonder what would happen with Y2K, and we always knew that the only way we would ever find out was to wait and see what happened. Well, now we know what