John D. Johnson,
Ph.D.
I don't see much data in many Y2K arguments that
downplay the significance of the event. Granted, the
problem with personal "stand alone" computers is
minimal. If you can't get your Quicken to work or if
your Windows 95 is not Y2K compliant it won't affect
many others and may only be a minor inconvenience to
you. But there are legacy systems that large
corporations and the government have that are
responsible for cutting paychecks and scheduling and
inventory. These systems are the ones that have gotten
much of the press. The idea is that these huge
programs with millions of lines of code that were
written in COBOL twenty years ago, will not properly
account for the change over to the year 2000. Indeed
this has been the focus of many people, and most of
the large corporations, public utilities and
government agencies have thrown money at this problem
over the past year to several years. I hope they are
successful, but we just won't know until they perform
tests on their systems. Some companies and utilities
don't have redundant systems so that they can properly
test the rewritten codes. So in those cases, we will
just have to wait and see how it turns out.
Many people overlook the myriad imbedded systems
that we don't see day to day. These systems run
everything from bank vault doors to sprinklers to
street lights to elevators to expensive
telecommunication satellites. These chips can either
work with the wrong date after the year 2000 (i.e.
1900) or they can fail altogether. It is no longer a
matter of the year being confused, if you have certain
chips with two registers that try to roll over into
three digits they may cause the imbedded system to
fail to work at all.
Sure, a middle aged computer repairman in Santa Fe
may have nothing to worry about. I think that Santa Fe
is a pretty safe place. But if you compound the
"inconvenience" of Y2K problems (computer programs AND
imbedded systems that you can't just "flip a switch"
to fix) and the knee jerk reactions of people en
masse, you can have great problems, especially in
larger metropolitan areas.
The argument that a company won't let its flow of
profit be interrupted may be valid for Citicorp, but
not so for the small business that doesn't have the
resources to properly fix the problem. This argument
also doesn't address the imbedded systems that rely on
date calculations to function properly. Many of these
systems will be isolated and fixed, but there will
still be many chips imbedded in some piece of
machinery (especially those that are hard to reach and
repair like transatlantic or space satellite systems)
that won't be found out until after Y2K. And with
everything tied together as networked as we are today,
how many weak links need to break to bring down an ATM
system or a portion of the power grid or telephone
service? Remember that the US Government has given
dismal grades for fixing the Y2K problem to
departments like DOD, Education, HHS, State
Department, DOT and AID. And if the progress of the
richest country on the planet can be unsatisfactory,
how well do you expect poorer nations to fare? If you
have an answer to this then please respond to my
proposition with some facts. It is simply impossible
to know where every failure will occur on a planet
wide scale. We don't have records of what has been
installed that needs fixing from the past few decades.
How detailed are you when you install a sprinkler
system? You generally know where things are, but will
the next person who buys your house? We just don't
know where all the problems will occur and how they
will interrelate. Faced with that uncertainty, the
logic that businesses collecting profit or the
government collecting taxes won't be impeded is silly.
I am sure that everyone is trying to some level to
prevent loss of profit - but we won't know how
successful they will be until after the fact.
People prepare for earthquakes, but they feel that
computers can't hurt them. Maybe when there is three
feet of snow in Chicago over the same weekend and
plows can't get out you can consider that an
inconvenience - unless you can't get your prescription
from the pharmacy or unless you happen to be
particularly susceptible to "disaster situations".
I don't think that it is merely a computer glitch.
Public perception/hysteria over the millennium, deep
seated desires for a release of responsibility due to
a chaotic breakdown of society, financial worries
because of the media focus as 2000 approaches on what
could happen, and all hell could break loose. I don't
think it is worth going crazy over though. But
seriously, what is wrong with preparing a little
bit?
Let's say that out of the millions and millions of
imbedded chips that regulate based on day of week (it
isn't that they really care about the year but they
have to calculate the day of week) there are shortages
and outages. Combined with public panic this could
lead to looting and riots in major cities. I wouldn't
rule that out.
People are going to seem to be radical if they
encourage preparation for something that is as unseen
as the Y2K bug. All I encourage people to do is
prepare for the inconvenience. Doctors who believed in
viruses and bacteria (also "unseen" and not understood
by the common public) were considered radical once
too. No one believed those who tried to convince
people that malaria was carried by mosquitos. People
who try to downplay the significance of this event,
either don't understand that the issue is not just "My
computer thinks it is 1900", or they are eternal
optimists, because I don't see them backing up their
rosy view of things with any facts.
It is insulting to hear someone say that Y2K is
much ado about nothing. The US Government and US
Businesses have spent billions attacking this problem.
Because they understand the devastating effects that
will occur if they don't address it. Will all the
critical systems in this country be fixed. One can
hope so. But many less critical systems will still
have problems, they will be jury rigged (and we will
spend the next decade upgrading these systems that are
fooled into believing it is 1972), many less critical
systems will cause public concern as they cause
inconvenience. Then consider the inconvenience that
economies around the world will face that haven't
spent the money or had the expertise to upgrade their
systems and wrench out and replace all their imbedded
chips. We simply don't know the magnitude of the
problem, we only know that there is a problem and
untrained people poo-poo'ing this and minimizing it
are as harmful as the doom prophets.
As the year 2000 approaches we will have precursor
shock waves to warn us to the actual magnitude of the
problem. August 22, 1999 there is a major GPS software
rollover. This is the first time it has been tested
and could affect international fund transfers and
navigation. On 9/99 programs that use 9999 as end of
file will be vulnerable. When the Dow hits 10,000
programs that haven't been updated to account for the
extra column will be affected. I expect that
uncertainty and fear will compound the problem and
along with weak and failing world economies we will
see a volatile year in the stock market.
Is all doom and gloom? No. Not at all. We are a
very resilient society and our track record is to sit
around until we get hit by a problem and then react
and fix it. We certainly have the manpower and
intellect to remedy a fix to a problem such as this,
but we don't like to be told the sky is falling until
after it happens. We are also not the society of WWII.
We do not pull together as we once did. We no longer
know our neighbors and have block parties. We tend to
be introverted with ourselves or our families and we
don't trust and rely on strangers any more. When faced
with a disaster that lasts more than a few hours we
start looking out for our own first and not the needs
of the community. Plus, there are groups in our
society that are eager to exploit such a disaster,
were it to occur. Groups that are armed and eager to
take power and possessions of others. So even if the
worst doesn't happen, isn't it common sense to not
bury your head in the sand and prepare? If there is
even a strong chance that the hysteria, panic, fear
and those pesky little computers that run our lives
will cause a few days of outages and inconvenience
then we should be better prepared than we are now.
I awoke the other day without power in my house.
Granted it was 40 degrees in Santa Fe and I wasn't
going to freeze like a grandmother in Buffalo who just
got hit by 55 inches of snow overnight. But it was
strange to see how much I relied on electricity. I
didn't even have a transistor radio in the house
anymore. Everything that I own relies on the phone
company and the electric company and city water. When
I was a kid it wasn't a big deal to go without power
for a day or two, but can you do that living in a city
today? What happens when refrigerated food starts to
spoil, air conditioning doesn't circulate the air in a
high rise any more and garbage disposals just ferment
food? When garbage doesn't get picked up and roads
aren't plowed... Imagine you are in metropolitan area
when outages hit. No TV, radio, pagers, cell phones,
microwave ovens... How many of us have stocked cellars
or pantries these days? I don't. I live a few days at
a time. I don't have money put aside to pay the rent
if my business wasn't able to function for a week or
more. Maybe we should make the best of the possibility
of disaster caused by the year 2000 and start to
become a bit more self sufficient. Even if we sail
through the year 2000 without a hitch it may be good
practice to divorce ourselves from relying on
computers and gadgets as much as we do. We may eat an
unhealthy diet, but why wait for that first heart
attack to make a radical change in our way of
living?
Is the Y2K bug real? Yes. Is the Y2K bug likely to
cause the downfall of our society? No. Is the Y2K bug,
compounded with the societal effects of the millennium
likely to cause a great deal of fear and
inconvenience? I believe the answer is an emphatic
yes. I can't say for how long or to what extent the
problems will manifest themselves, but a little
preparation over the coming year can't hurt, can
it?
(c) 1999 John D. Johnson, Ph.D.
Dr. Johnson is a computer consultant in Santa Fe,
New Mexico. He has managed computer systems at Los
Alamos National Laboratory and continues to consult
there on computer related issues. He uses a Macintosh
which is invulnerable to Y2K nasties, however he
worries that managers have tried to cover their asses
by spending money without actually addressing all the
problems, and they will either be laying on the beach
in Rio when the year 2000 rolls around or raising
their prices to scramble and fix the problem after it
occurs.