http://infoseek.go.com/Content?arn=a0643LBY686reulb-19990505&qt=pakistan&sv=IS&lk=noframes&col=NX&kt=A&ak=news1486

[snip]

INTERVIEW-Pakistan told to reveal more on Y2K

04:24 a.m. May 05, 1999 Eastern

By Ovais Subhani

KARACHI, May 5 (Reuters) - Pakistan needs to make public more information on its Y2K readiness to avoid the risk of being shut out from the rest of the world, an official of leading global chip-maker Intel Corp said on Wednesday.

``There is a potential risk that a lot of countries (and) companies, would refuse to interface with countries that have not brought their year 2000 readiness to the same level as they are,'' Phillip Wong, Intel's year 2000 programme manager for the Asia-Pacific, told Reuters.

``There is very little information'' about Pakistan's readiness ``and it is very important that companies dealing with Pakistan should have the confidence that the whole of Pakistan is year 2000 capable,'' he said.

[snip]

``If you have a system that is so-called non-compliant trying to interface with a system that is compliant, the non-compliant could very well contaminate'' the compliant, Wong said.

``A lot of financial institutions in the world, especially in the West...will have very stiff criteria in terms of banking transactions.

Many of these institutions would question whether Pakistan counterparts' internal systems were compliant and not take a risk that those systems could potentially introduce a bug or erroneous data, he said.

Wong said because there is a general perception a lot of Asian countries lag behind in working on the problem, many companies around the world might avoid them or prefer manual dealing to avoid computer system contamination.

``The general feeling that I got is that a lot of people think, even government officials, that there are very few computers in Pakistan so there may not be any implications,'' said Wong, visiting Pakistan to assess Y2K readiness.

``But a lot of private and government organisations do a lot of their transactions and communications online and there will be implications for them,'' he said.

Wong said overseas companies dealing with Pakistani institutions like banks, airports, airlines and internet users have to have confidence the whole country, including its telecommunication systems, is year 2000 capable.

He said Pakistan has been categorised by researchers as among the countries with the highest risk of being non-compliant.

``Pakistan should start working on contingency plans if they think that they may not be compliant..., but you know this would mean additional costs for private companies, and for that the government should come up with a plan,'' he said.

Wong suggested Pakistan start certififying companies whose systems are compliant and offer tax incentives to encourage companies to meet the standard.

Copyright 1999 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.

[snip]

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), May 07, 1999

Answers

Obviously, the good news is that, where noncompliance is KNOWN, shutting the door may prevent contamination. The bad news is:

.... if countries or banks are misrepresenting compliance, it will be difficult to tell, especially across countries where cross-system testing will most likely be lax.

.... it tends to confirm Andy's contention that the banking system worldwide is subject to data contamination as a REAL threat, not just in theory. Perhaps Hoff can ask Wong for some examples!

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), May 07, 1999.

Waht a bunch of rubes they have at Intel. Contaminated data my eye! I used to fervently believe in such risk, but the polly programmers on this forum have patronizingly explained to me over and over and over that corrupt data is transmitted daily, the controls are in place to identify and deal with the data. It's not a problem now and it won't be a problem ever.

Intel! . . . What a bunch of know-nothing rubes! Tell those Goobers to hang out on this forum and hear the local pollys (some REAL programmers) solve this elementary business challenge. Intel!

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), May 07, 1999.

The Banks will collapse even if the US IS COMPLIANT.

-- FLAME AWAY (BLehman202@aol.com), May 07, 1999.

LOL, Puddin. What do those Intel guys know, anyway?

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), May 07, 1999.

Yes, but is Paul Wong a Certified Electronics Technician.

-- a (a@a.a), May 07, 1999.

I thought that was Certified Eststablishment Troll.

-- Mike Lang (webflier@erols.com), May 07, 1999.

*sigh* well that shows what I know - I thought poole was Completely Encrusted with, er, uh, well, you get the idea....

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), May 08, 1999.

It's funny how whenever the subject of imported data comes up - by Intel no less - Hoff, Flint and Poole are nowhere to be seen.

What a bunch of hypocrites after the roasting they continually try to give me..

IMPORTED DATA IS REAL YOU MAROONS AND WILL BYTE YOUR SORRY ASSES :)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 08, 1999.

Sorry, Andy, contrary to some opinions, I don't monitor this forum 24x7.

We'll disregard the obvious misstatement about "introducing a bug".

I posted an answer over on the other thread titled "Yardeni...", so I won't take up alot of space here.

The interesting quote in this article is:

``A lot of financial institutions in the world, especially in the West...will have very stiff criteria in terms of banking transactions.

Many of these institutions would question whether Pakistan counterparts' internal systems were compliant and not take a risk that those systems could potentially introduce a bug or erroneous data, he said.

Again, it points to the fact that institutions are testing and evaluating external interfaces, and if a problem is not addressed, the interface will be shutdown.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-dejanews.com), May 08, 1999.

PRECISELY old chap,

Why oh why do you always WALK into this one.

You just said "they will be shut down"...

Think about it, a Banking system of systems with countless endpoints "shut down" is NO LONGER A BANKING SYSTEM.

It can't be.

It can't function as it used to.

The sytem WILL HAVE by default, collapsed.

It's really very simple to understand - but you just cannot make this quantum leap to acceptance can you Hoff?

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 08, 1999.