Today In Year-based Computer Errors: Draft Notices Sent To Men Born In the 1800s 205
sandbagger (654585) writes with word of a Y2K-style bug showing up in Y2K14: "The glitch originated with the Pennsylvania Department of Motor Vehicles during an automated data transfer of nearly 400,000 records. The records of males born between 1993 and 1997 were mixed with those of men born a century earlier. The federal agency didn't know it because the state uses a two-digit code to indicate birth year." I wonder where else two-digit years are causing problems; I still see lots of paper forms that haven't made the leap yet to four digits.
Y10K Compliant (Score:4, Funny)
Get with the times! Switch to Y10K compliance already.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Y10K Compliant (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
No faith in scientific progress? (Score:3)
Good Luck, I'm Behind 14,000 Skeletons (Score:5, Funny)
It's clear that Pennsylvania was taking a cue from Heroes of Might and Magic 3 and attempting to build an unstoppable army of 14,000 skeletons. I wonder what the Pennsylvania governor's necromancy score is?
Re:Good Luck, I'm Behind 14,000 Skeletons (Score:5, Funny)
Pennsylvania, Transylvania, it's all the same.
Re:Good Luck, I'm Behind 14,000 Skeletons (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
TESO has 14,000 players? are you sure you are not inflating things?
Re: (Score:3)
The dead buried at Gettysburg would make a fine army.
Re: (Score:2)
Former resident? Does that mean you are already part of the undead hordes?
Resurrection (Score:5, Funny)
I see the plot of a new Micheal Bay (or maybe J.J. Abrams) movie: The US military, unable to get qualified recruits to fight the new Zombie wars, takes a cue from the Zombie playbook and develops the technology to bring life old soldiers. After a bit of a difficult start, the program exceeds all expectations until the previously dead soldiers revolt at being put back in the grave and bring Washington to it's knees by filing for Social Security benefits.
Re: (Score:3)
I see the plot of a new Micheal Bay (or maybe J.J. Abrams) movie: The US military, unable to get qualified recruits to fight the new Zombie wars, takes a cue from the Zombie playbook and develops the technology to bring life old soldiers. After a bit of a difficult start, the program exceeds all expectations until the previously dead soldiers revolt at being put back in the grave and bring Washington to it's knees by filing for Social Security benefits.
Hmm. Nice twist at the end, but too much plot, needs more explosions.
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like it's right up M. Night's alley, though, save the fact it's actually a half-decent idea for a film.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And shaky-cam. So much shaky-cam that you can't even really focus on the explosions.
Centenarians leaping out of doorways ahead of supersonically-expanding balls of incinerating flames.
Re: (Score:3)
I see the plot of a new Micheal Bay (or maybe J.J. Abrams) movie: The US military, unable to get qualified recruits to fight the new Zombie wars, takes a cue from the Zombie playbook and develops the technology to bring life old soldiers. After a bit of a difficult start, the program exceeds all expectations until the previously dead soldiers revolt at being put back in the grave and bring Washington to it's knees by filing for Social Security benefits.
Well, as long as they vote Democrat I'm cool with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, The Simpsons covered that years ago [clayloomis.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The sequel involves stopping the revolt with cavalry lead by an undead George Patton.
mislabeled (Score:3)
Seems to me this would be more accurately described as a Century-based computer error.
At first I was amazed that we're still running into these things. But I shouldn't be surprised -- often problems like this aren't fixed until they cause some inconvenience for the people responsible for fixing them.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure both of the affected are rather flattered (Score:2)
This affects what, 3 actual living persons?
RTFA (Score:2)
The agency realized the error when it began receiving calls from bewildered relatives last week.
It is the relative if the intended recipients that have the issue.
Re: (Score:2)
This affects what, 3 actual living persons?
But with the usual mess in government records, quite a number of dead souls.
Re:I'm sure both of the affected are rather flatte (Score:4, Funny)
But with the usual mess in government records, quite a number of dead souls.
The dead are often a pivotal election demographic.
Re: (Score:3)
Good point. I suppose in Pennsylvania this could be perceived as a problem, but in New York or Illinois draft eligiblity would just be the dead's civic duty, right alongside voting and jury participation.
Don't disenfranchise our patriotic dead!
Re: (Score:2)
How do you think Penn. has clung to one party rule for so many years?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I'm sure both of the affected are rather flatte (Score:4, Funny)
I think any election a century or so ago qualifies now.
Re: (Score:2)
But with the usual mess in government records, quite a number of dead souls.
The dead are often a pivotal election demographic.
A dead soul is a prerequisite for becoming a politician.
Re: (Score:2)
Not dead. Sold.
Re: (Score:2)
Not dead. Sold.
They aren't mutually exclusive.
Re: (Score:2)
Technically, it's not a "draft notice" (Score:5, Informative)
Not to digress, but for those who don't know, the draft was very controversial during the Vietnam War, with the rich and powerful were able to get their sons exceptions to the draft or get them plum assignments in the National Guard that wouldn't require them to actually go to Vietnam. Listen to Credence Clearwater Revival's "Fortunate Son", which was written about the practice. There was so much animosity about the unfairness of the draft and the compulsion to fight in a war that nobody but a small number of politicians seemed to want that the US switched to a voluntary system, but one of the deals cut to move to this system was that Selective Service had to know where to get young men should the draft ever get reinstated. And yes, female US citizens are not subject to this at all.
Re: (Score:3)
>And yes, female US citizens are not subject to this at all.
Clearly sexism, but it doesn't really matter because they won't reinstate the draft. The government couldn't get away with insane crap like the Iraq invasion if anyone's kids could wind up there.
Re: (Score:3)
The Selective Service System had discontinued it during Nixon's administration but during Jimmy Carter's administration the President got the draft re-instated as a chest pounding measure to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Outlooks for economic prosperity and peace were positive for 1914 up until the day World War I broke out so until the Selective Service System is once again repealed (perhaps with a constitutional amendment as one of the replies suggests) I wouldn't put it past the government to activa
Re: (Score:3)
The Selective Service System had discontinued it during Nixon's administration but during Jimmy Carter's administration the President got the draft registration re-instated as a chest pounding measure to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
There. FTFY. As I recall, I had to register with the Selective Service System when I turned 18. There was no draft. However, the law did have some teeth, as those who did not register were deemed ineligible for Federal college financial aid programs.
Re: (Score:2)
I recall some talk during the lead-up to the Afghan war about the potential for a draft. It wasn't clear at the time just how big that particular conflict would get. It wasn't impossible to imagine it turning into World War-sized scenario against a lot of Islamic countries. The resulting conflicts were small compared to that, but we had to scale up the military substantially and if they'd grown any bigger we'd have had to have a draft.
Now that women are allowed access to combat positions, it's going to be v
Re: (Score:3)
See my other post. 'Stop loss' orders were issued, which amounted to a draft.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, though not a general draft. Still a rather shocking thing to have happened, since it disguised the need for a general draft, that might have altered people's perceptions of the war.
Re: (Score:2)
But I think that, while it's politically impossible, a really good pragmatic case could be made for starting to require Selective Service registration for everybody right now.
The only thing that should happen is for the draft to be outright banned via a constitutional amendment. It's disgusting that any country that claims to be free allows such a thing to exist.
You might want to take that up with Austria, Finland, Israel, Norway and Greece, amongst others [wikipedia.org].
Note that the US (unlike many other countries) does most emphatically not have compulsory military service. So, your call for a constitutional amendment seems rather ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
The age bracket in question is, today, decidedly not non-violent. Opposition to a draft today might not take the form of "flower power" and "sit ins." More likely, it would provoke the militia movement into actual violence.
That's so cute! I bet you believe in Santa and the tooth fairy too! You are very naive, friend. Things would not go down that way, at all. Also back in the 1960s and 1970s, not all the protesting was non-violent [wikipedia.org]. And even when it was non-violent, the police often were not. That certainly hasn't changed.
What's more, you'd see quite a bit of this sort of thing [wikipedia.org]. I'm not sure who this "militia movement" might be, but if you think they'll spark firefights with police/military/other government folks over
Re: (Score:2)
The closest we get to that is the airport, where rights have been considerably and visibly curtailed (as opposed to the comparatively invisible loss of rights due to government intrusion in electronic communications). People seem to have accepted that more or less gracefully: they bitch, but it's not seen as a massive imposition on most people's daily lives.
I don't know if we'd ever get to the point of rationing food. Even if we declared a full-scale war, technology means we grow a lot of surplus food in th
Re: (Score:3)
You forgot the carrot .. While registering for Selective service is not compulsory:
Registration for Selective Service is also required for various federal programs and benefits, including student loans (such as FAFSA), job training, federal employment, and naturalization.
Selective service [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I take that back .. you ARE required to register
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
At least they didn't give you the "I don't care, you still have to register" bureaucratic BS.
Not necessarily "crack pot" (Score:2)
During George W. Bush's first term, prior to the invasion of Iraq, Charles Rangel introduced a bill to reinstate the draft. While Rangel probably should have retired a few years ago I think this was a good move even if it amounted to nothing...
The New York Democrat told reporters his goal is two-fold: to jolt Americans into realizing the import of a possible unilateral strike against Iraq, which he opposes, and "to make it clear that if there were a war, there would be more equitable representation of peop
Re:Technically, it's not a "draft notice" (Score:5, Informative)
a war that nobody but a small number of politicians seemed to want
This is revisionist nonsense. Vietnam was the most popular war in US history. At the time of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution [wikipedia.org], 90% of American's supported deeper involvement. No other war has ever had so much support. For instance, only 70% of Americans thought the 2003 invasion of Iraq was a good idea. Of course, support for any war declines as it drags on, especially if we appear to be losing. But it is a lot easier to get into a war than out, so it is only the support at the beginning that matters.
The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution passed the Senate with 98 votes. The two senators that opposed it were both voted out of office at the next election. It is silly to say that this war was forced on the American people by the politicians, when the truth is that it was fear of the voters that pushed the politicians into supporting the war.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. Yes, it was popular enough in '64, but after a few years of people's sons coming home in boxes the popularity had waned a good bit. Even moreso when people noticed none of those boxes were going to wealthy homes.
Re:Technically, it's not a "draft notice" (Score:4, Informative)
Phrases like "revisionist nonsense" and "it is silly to say" should likely be used sparingly unless you have a very deep grasp of your subject matter.
Conflating the Tonkin Gulf Resolution with America's war in Vietnam would be a mistake. In bringing Tonkin into an argument you may wish to acquaint yourself with records detailing the Johnson Administration's orchestration of the resolution. See Michael Beschloss's work for instance, or the Pentagon Papers, either portions of the full set or the single volume if your time is short. With Tonkin Johnson was reacting from fear of voters, but the documentary record shows clearly that the Administration wished to expand the war despite public sentiment, not because of it.
In arguing that the war in Vietnam was popular you will likely want to look at some actual polling data, http://www.gallup.com/poll/119... [gallup.com] for instance. Anecdotal evidence such as Nixon's 1968 platform may also prove useful to you.
Re: (Score:2)
you will likely want to look at some actual polling data ...
This polling data is after the war was already started, so it doesn't count. It is much harder to get out of a war than it is to avoid it in the first place. So it is only effective to oppose starting the war. In later years there were hundreds (eventually over a thousand) of Americans in North Vietnamese prison camps. Thousands more were missing in action. Tens of thousands were dead, and their deaths would be "in vain" if we pulled out (there are no "sunk costs" in politics). North Vietnam was compl
Re: (Score:3)
Yes there was the feeling that pulling out would cause the deaths to be in vain, however it was pretty clear to many that there was no practical hope of "winning" and that it would just kill more people (of which the Americans were just a small fraction).
The draft is really what got us out of it. People did not like that their children were dying because of a unlucky draw at the draft office, and yes there were a lot of rich kids unable to get out of service. Today it's different because most of those vol
Re: (Score:3)
Only 70% supported invasion of Iraq? I'm amazed it is that high. I meet so few people who through (before or after) that it was a good idea.
Vietnam started popular but it got very unpopular over time. Unlike Dubya's insistence that Americans should do things normally and forget that there was an ongoing war, in the Vietnam era there was an omnipresent reminder that there was a war and that it had been going to for a very long time and that people were dying with no discernable change in the militaryh pos
Re: (Score:3)
And the system has been more-or-less broken for a very long time. In the mid 1980's I got back from a SSBN patrol to find waiting for me in the mail a notice from Selective Service warning me that having failed to register I was ineligible for all manner of Federal programs. (I hadn't registered because I enlisted in the Navy shortly after my 17th birthday.) Of course being on active duty or a veterans trumps Selective Service registration for eligibility, and it took a letter from my command along with
Re: (Score:2)
My Uncle looked at his draft number, and enlisted (more control over assignment).
He was right.
My grandmother forwarded his induction notice to him in Viet Nam.
He had the cook lay down, poured catchup over his head[1], and stood with his foot on the cook--and sent the picture back, from Viet Nam, to the draft board.
hawk
[1] Kind of silly to worry about color for a B&W picture . . .
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Once you eliminate all the stated reasons, all that is left, and so the true purpose of the Selective Service registration, is to attempt to be a nucleus for protest. Those
Re: (Score:3)
It's not called a draft. It's called a 'stop loss' order. During the worst years of Iraq-Afghanistan people at the end of their original service requirements were not allowed to leave. It was mostly for critical specialties but a draft by any other name is still a draft.
Of course they're sending draft notices to... (Score:2)
...these guys.
How else are we going to beat the Kaiser?
Stupid Y2K bug. (Score:2)
Year-10,000 updates? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
What might have happened. (Score:4)
One scenario: some systems have tables that use a separate field for storing the century. Whoever wrote the query, sql statement, or whatever, left out the century, and there you have it. Probably not a Y2K problem, but more like a dumbass programmer problem.
Re: (Score:2)
One scenario: some systems have tables that use a separate field for storing the century.
I'm guessing the Databases they were using back in the 1800's didn't have that capability.
Re: (Score:2)
One scenario: some systems have tables that use a separate field for storing the century.
Why do you think they have that field? Why would someone design a database that is less efficient and encourages wrong queries?
Most likely because someone previously fucked up and thought 2-digit years would be enough, by the time they realised they needed to fix that it was easier to add a new field than change the semantics of an existing one. Given that how accurate do you expect the data in the centuary field to be for old records?
and in some databases they didn't even go as far as adding a century fie
Re: (Score:2)
>up and thought 2-digit years would be enough,
When economists actually looked at the *data* for the "Y2K problem," they found that it would have cost, in discounted real dollars, three times as much to prevent the problem as it would have to avoid . . .
doc hawk, economist
Re: (Score:2)
My daughter (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A bit younger than my daughter, so your daughter has a higher chance than mine (and my kid's chances are non-zero) of living in three different centuries (20th, 21st, 22nd).
I'm thinking that noone has ever done that (unless you count some Biblical codgers)....
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, there are people who were born in the 19th century and were still alive in the 21st. As of a year ago, there were 21 women born in the 19th century still alive.
Re: (Score:2)
Curiously, 17 of their husbands died in battle after being drafted past the age of 90 . . .
hawk
Re: (Score:2)
Why assume 2200? In my experience, more things now rely on two digit years, not less. If a bad programmer today is coding something that never deals with historical records, only future dates, what is the incentive to be diligent about using four digit years? We've already established he's not very good, and if he even thought about, it, he probably assumes he won't be working 86 years from now when someone notices his bug.
01/01/1900 (Score:2)
Meh. Crap like that happens all the time, Y2K or no. Migrating 400k records stuff is bound to come up, particularly with old data, likely legacy systems, and probably shoddy migrations the 3 previous times this occurred. What is more concerning is the lack of QC or validation that led to the issue. Meaning likely those doing the migration no nothing of the DB contents, or are understaffed and underfunded to the point that no one has time to do it properly.
I've seen 01/01/1900 time date mix ups which is like
A Fearless Golden Years Army! (Score:2)
Makes perfect sense - which would make for a more fearless army, a bunch of 18 year old boys, or a retirement home full of centenarians with Alzheimer's and/or stage 4 cancer?
Human-wave attacks of volunteer centenarians against ISIS FTW.
Re: (Score:2)
Better Crunching (Score:2)
Re: dmv (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:dmv (Score:5, Insightful)
The DMV existed in the 1800's?
People don't get driver's licenses when they are born. Thousands of people born in the 1890s were still driving in the 1990s, and a few were still driving in the 2000s.
Re: (Score:2)
People don't generally drive at 100 or 110...
Re: (Score:2)
People don't generally drive at 100 or 110...
My car is fast enough. Though it isnt safe to travel that fast away from a track.
Re:dmv (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Vision and competence are also requirements ...
I live in California, and I can assure you that competence is not a requirement here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm amazed that so many have kept the same address that relatives would be receiving the mail.
Re:any responses (Score:5, Funny)
"Ulysses you old rat bastard, I'm not fallin' for that trick again. Let 'em secede."
Re: any responses (Score:2)
Re: The ticket should be over 14 years old (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Which is why we should write out "2014" as "000000000000002014". That should last us long enough.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I don't know about those first two groups, but the third is one of my favorites.
Re: (Score:2)
How about a hexadecimal object ID?
Re: (Score:2)
Well THERE'S the problem right there! Your neighbors were in charge of fixing the DMV's software!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
AIUI they used the DMV (driver registration) database to send out these reminders. Is it really that surprising that someone born in the 1890s could have been driving up to say the 1980s and have active records in the driving license database continuing into the 1990s and 2000s?
Re: (Score:2)
AIUI (I don't live in the US so their may be errors in this)
To issue notices to register for the draft (there is no draft in the US at the moment but registration is still required in case there is one) you need two things, firstly a list of people with their addresses, secondly a list of people who have already registered for the draft. Then they can take the people who are in the first list and not in the second list and send them notices.
So the question becomes where to get that list, why the DMV well it