Tom Benjamin, an occasional poster on this forum and frequent contributor to the usenet newsgroup comp.software.year-2000, authored the following last year. I think it is even more succinct now than it was back then. This piece quite nicely crystalizes the frustration that many of us feel with the Y2k issue.

---

Robert Brock wrote:

>To expect an electric company to guarantee that you will have power
>1-1-00 is unreasonable.  The power company can't guarantee that your 
>home will have electricity when the sun goes down today.

I agree. I don't expect this kind of guarantee. What an electric 
company should be able to guarantee is that they recognized that the 
Y2K problem existed and took appropriate steps to remediate in time 
to fix it. They should be able to guarantee that all the rollover 
issues have at least been addressed. I do not even expect that they 
should be able to guarantee that the fix was sure to work.

I have no guarantee but I have confidence that I will have power at 
the stroke of midnight tonight. I am entitled to exactly the same 
level of confidence at the stroke of midnight 2000/01/01. I have no 
guarantee that if I do lose power tonight at midnight that I will 
regain power in a few hours (probably) or days (at the outside), but 
I am very confident of that, too. I am entitled to the same level of 
confidence if the power goes out on 2000/01/01.

We do not have that reasonable level of confidence. The responsibility
is mind boggling. Every responsible company should be posting 
information that looks and sounds like Bethlehem Steel or the 
Springfield power plant. Every single one of them should have been 
on top of that problem a looooong time ago. That it is even a race 
is outrageous, never mind that it is a race that any reasonable 
observer would say is being lost.

I don't want a guarantee. I want the CEO of every power company to 
get up on a stage and tell me why it is even a race. Why they are not
finished right now. Why they let us get in a position where a Gary 
North, el whacko extraordinaire, is actually taken seriously. 
"Explain that, you asshole," I'd say. 'Tell me why we should not take
you out and hang you for not being finished right now."

>When they say that they will be ready (either with remidiation and/or
>contingency plans) the response in this group is that they are lying. 
>If they can't gurantee that all electric utilities will be remediated 
>the response is that...if all of the power companies can't gruantee 
>that they will be remediated it's the end of the  world.

They *will* be remediated?! They should be ready NOW! It will not be 
the end of the world if they are not remediated, but it *might* be the
end of western civilization, and it *will* kill people. This is 
exactly why they should be ready NOW. That they are not ready now is 
inexcusable.

We should all be pointing at Gary North and saying "Look at the nut! 
Sure there will be problems, because it was very big project and 
something was probably missed. But the problem *has* been fixed and 
they still have 13 months to work on ironing out all the bugs."

"Why can't I say that about Gary North, you asshole?" I would shout 
at the CEO of the power company. "Why are you racing to finish?" 

>As more and more milestones are passed in the Y2k countdown and 
>nothing happens, the probablity of a Y2k breakdown seems less and 
>less likely.  So far what I have seen is companies identifying these 
>critical dates and doing what needs to be done to correct or work 
>around the problem.

I don't think the milestones mean anything unless they are visible 
and then they only mean something if Joe Public notices. Y2K failures
have been around for a long time. Companies basically started the fix 
when they started having failures. The number of those failures is 
accelerating as we approach the year 2000. Most of the failures are 
not visible to Joe Public.

That is going to change. It is changing.

I think if we make it to May or June we will make it all the way to
2000/01/01 and we will see what will happen, finally. But there are 
miles to go before we sleep, and the public concern is rising.

And rightfully so!

"Listen up, asshole," I would say to the CEO of the Royal Bank. 
"I have to tell people not to take money out of the bank. I tell them 
the banks *have* to make it, or your cash is nothing but bits of paper
anyway. If everyone takes cash out, it is over."

My voice is shaking in rage. "Why can't I just tell everyone all the 
banks have fixed the problem? Why can't I just tell them you guys are 
all done? Cased closed. Maybe it is because you are an ireresponsible 
asshole, eh? Why aren't you already finished? Why do we even have to 
imagine bank runs? You asshole!"

>Should Y2k be a complete fizzle, I would hate to be in the shoes of 
>those "experts" who were too vocal about the enevatible collapse.  
>If I had quit my job,moved into the wilderness, and bought a years 
>supply of food based on their "expert" predictions...I wouldn't be 
>a happy camper.  (I couldn't help the pun).

First of all, I do not recommend that you either quit your job or 
move to the wilderness. I do suggest that you figure to be able to 
take care of yourself for three months. After that we are all playing 
it by ear anyway. I want more than that but that's only because I am 
terrified.

Second, I will be delighted if Y2K "fizzles". I will be every bit as 
angry at the CEO of AT&T as I am today.

"Look at what you are put me through, you asshole!" I would scream. 
"Why weren't you finished in lots of time? Why didn't you get done 
by, say, July of 1998? Your irresponsibility cost me time, money and 
grief. You asshole! Why was it even a race?"

I no longer trust the assholes. They lost me because they are not 
already finished. Our lives are at stake and it should not be close. 
It should not be a race. We should not be arguing about whether the 
race is being won.

I no longer trust the assholes. Do you?

Tom

P.S. "Pssst. The theatre is on fire. This is not a drill. Walk calmly 
to the nearest exit. Pass it on."

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

Answers

I'm Joe Public and until recently I havn't been giving much attention to y2k. Based on the past years news reports I had accepted that the issues were being addressed -- no need to worry. I'm a mechanical engineer for a north Jersey manufacturer and as of September 98 we completed our y2k compliance. I assumed other businesses were doing the same.

What really shocked me was that two months ago I read a report about the readiness, or rather un-readiness of the utilities. That caused me to dig deeper outside the mainstream media. As Robert Brock points out, why havn't they fixed the problem? What has kept the utilities from acting on this crucial issue? Why are they not divulging their detailed plans and status for readiness?

I appreciate the intelligent discussions that are going on in this forum. Hats off to all the commentors and researchers!

Two months ago I called my electric utility to ask what they have done. My utility is a local electric department that distributes power from other sources. I had a lengthy discussion with the operation manager about y2k. It soon became evident that they didn't even have a y2k compliance program. I knew far more about the subject than this manager. I asked him if he received information from his suppliers that he can pass on, one being PECO. He had nothing.

This manager is also responsible for the local water and sewer system. Nothing going on there either. The only y2k action that he mentioned was that one of the local police officers knows something about computers and is working on some of the towns systems. He said they lack resources to implement an extensive program. But what gets me is that this guy was not alarmed by the situation. He started complaining about the calls from local businesses asking for readiness statements. I suggested issuing a newsletter and distributing this to the customers. He was concerned about litigation. I told him not to commit to statements about completion only to state what has been completed and what is planned to resolve the problem. Just let people know what is going on. He liked that idea but as far as I know nothing has been sent.

I accumulated some information for him and sent him a letter offering my help with pursuing a y2k project. No response after two months.

Yes I'm worried and taking steps to prepare for the worst, (not Gary North's worst but insuring the basic necessities). Is this just human nature to procrastinate until there is a visible threat? Are other John/Jane Publics so concerned with their current lives as not to consider the future? Do we rely too much on the government to take care of us? These are questions I keep asking myself.

I am doing what I can in my community to help prepare, (I'm an old Boy Scout, i.e. "Be Prepared"). And if nothing does happen and y2k fizzles -- well than I am also better off. I have created stronger community ties. But I would not trust the government or corporation any more than I had. I realize they are short on absolute truth. Why is there a race now, less than five months from the deadline?

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

A small point, Karl - the above piece was written by Tom Benjamin (and posted earlier in this forum with his permission), and not by Robert Brock. Tom was simply responding to an earlier posting from Mr. Brock.

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

Rick,

Veerrryyy interesting. I couldn't have said it better myself. Imagine, this was issued last year and his feelings and attitudes are still appropriate. Groan. Some saltly language, but that can be excused, and I especially like the Gary North reference. I can remember when I thought Gary was "off the wall" but as time went by and things didn't improve very quickly I began to drift more and more into his way of looking at it all. My oh my. Wish we had more than 5 months to get this stuff fixed, but we don't. My oh my........

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

the point is gordon... last year it was already too late.

that is the reason we should have drafted a petition and brought some pressure to bear on the federalis regarding the nuclear power plants, tom benjamin is correct... our very lives are at risk and all we do is sit here and wax philosophic that a particular plant is still not complia, er, ready, because they accidentally posted it to their website for the whole world to see.

well, those are the simple types of errors that will bring down the whole deck of cards... and us with them.

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

Karl, I can identify with your efforts. Except my calls and letters to local officials were last year. About four months ago, my Alderman finally decided to hold a local area Y2K meeting. I got to pin him down about what our small city had done to date. They'd just recently "sent letters out". (To vendors) I asked him what responses they'd gotten. "Not many have come back yet." I asked him if they got a response saying a system had a Y2K problem, what was the plan?

The poor guy just shrugged. He wouldn't say anything. I pressed on and asked, "Are you trying to tell me that there's no money to fix anything if you find out it does need fixing?" He wouldn't look me in the eye, but he did say, "Well, there's nothing in this year's budget to cover any of this...."

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

Agreed with everything you said, but must take exception to your references to Gary North. While it's true that he may not have the best technical handle on y2k,he is the Paul Revere of this issue for many people.

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

He wouldn't look me in the eye, but he did say, "Well, there's nothing in this year's budget to cover any of this...."

Not long ago, I got an e-mail from a reader. He said he was a mechanical engineer; been in the health-care industry for 17 years. According to him, the industry finally "Got It" and was starting to address the problem... then the executives saw Y2K budget projections for FY 2000 and said, "Forget this". Time will tell, I guess.

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

Big OOOOOOPPPPSS! Sorry Rick,at first reading I thought that was your article.

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

I appreciate all the comments, thank you. It has been a long time since I read this piece.

While it is still very easy to get angry, I think frustration and resignation are my dominant emotions these days. My original guess was for either a wakeup call and a rational panic in the spring, or that we would see the happyface and denial right up until rollover. I'm standing by that guess even though I find it very hard to believe that we have another five months to get through before most people will believe Y2k is a real threat.

To me, the depth of the denial has been the most surprising part of the Y2k story when the threat is as plain as the nose on our faces. Y2k cannot have anything but a negative impact. It can impede our ability to generate and distribute electricity. It cannot enhance that ability. Y2k will be some degree of bad, but nobody knows how bad, and it is not hard to construct a hundred reasonable scenarios that spell out anywhere from somewhat bad to very bad.

I add that up and I say that it is rational to be concerned. In fact, it is irrational not to be concerned. Yet the denial is so powerful it is turned that inside out. I am the crazy one even though the NERC reports, the Senate report, and even Koskinen's reports provide ample reason for concern.

Overall the perception of the problem has been brilliantly managed, but the actual problem has not been managed well at all. It takes a systematic well supervised effort to solve the problem and in many places that is what we have seen. In most places? I don't think so. I agree with Bonnie - my local experience is very similar to hers. There is no real remediation going on in my town. We don't have the resources.

I do not think the utilities are lying exactly, but I do not believe we are getting the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. It is a combination of market forces, wishful thinking and an unwillingness to admit screwing up on such an unimaginable scale. And hey, it can't hurt to fudge a little bit because nobody is finding antything too serious anyway, right?

I think 100% of companies - or close to it - will declare themselves ready before rollover. They will be ready on a wing and a prayer and a contingency plan. It is going to get harder, not easier, to be a Y2k pessimist. That's only my guess, mind you.

I disagree with both Gordon and Kelly about Gary North. I do think he does grasp the gist of the problem and it does take a lot of courage to hold his particular views.

But I do not think he has done the Y2k movement much good. The problem is partly who he is and partly what he says. It does not help that this particular Paul Revere rang several false alarms before he landed on Y2k. He is very easy for mainstream America to dismiss for this reason alone.

Second, his solution is to head for the hills and that is not a viable answer for mainstream America. He offers most people a choice between denial and death. It should not surprise us that most people choose denial.

Finally, in the Y2k world he is very visible, and he made way too much of the early dates. His incorrect predictions about Y2k provide an awful lot of grist for the Pollyanna mill.

Many Y2k aware people can honestly say that he has helped them personally, but on balance, he has turned more people off than on in my opinion. Art Bell doesn't help either. A lot more people would consider Y2k a lot more seriously if he thought it was a hoax.

Tom

-- Anonymous, August 07, 1999