"'De Nile Aint Just a River in Egypt' ~ Social Pressure, Group Think, and Denial vs Common Sense in the Y2K and Embedded Systems Crisis", Part 6 of a White Paper on Y2K by Paula Gordon, is now posted at http://www.gwu.edu/~y2k/keypeople/gordon .

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

"'De Nile Aint Just a River in Egypt' ~ Social Pressure, Group Think, and Denial vs Common Sense in the Y2K and Embedded Systems Crisis" is Part 6 of the White Paper on the Y2K and Embedded Systems Crisis that I have written. It is now posted at http://www.gwu.edu/~y2k/keypeople/gordon. Click on Part 6 on the home page. This is the first installment of Part 6 of the White Paper: "A Call to Action: National and Global Implications of the Year 2000 and Embedded Systems Crisis".

The first installment of Part 6 of the White Paper focuses on common sense. This installment includes a Time Bomb Discussion Forum contribution by the King of Spain, with a most memorable illustration of common sense. Of even greater significance to the substance of Part 6, however, is a conversation between myself and John Koskinen that took place October 7 in Washington. For those who have not read the most recently posted parts of the White Paper, Part 4 addresses the question of why the Administration is not treating Y2K as a crisis. Part 5 describes best and worst case scenarios that could unfold in the weeks before the rollover. The best case scenarios are focused on what could still be done before the rollover in order to minimize the impacts of the crisis. The best case scenarios require will and the dedication of extraordinary efforts and resources and a commitment to the public good and the security of the nation.

For those who have not read any of the White Paper, Part 1 addresses the definition of the nature and scope of the Y2K and embedded systems crisis and discusses why it is a crisis. Part 2 focuses on embedded systems and the highest risk, highest hazard sectors that they could impact. Part 3 describes the kinds of proactive, crisis-oriented, problemsolving organizational efforts that are needed to address the crisis that we are in. That same orientation will be needed after the rollover as well to get us through the difficult times ahead.

A list of references and resources on Y2K is also available on the URL cited above.

Videotapes of a variety of Y2K-related programs and briefings can be found on http://www.y2kapproaches.com/real/pgordon.htm . The necessary software to view the videos is available free of charge at that website. These resources are offered as a means of broadening understanding concerning the current crisis, understanding of its nature and scope and understanding of what actions can be still be taken at this point in time.

-- Paula Gordon (pgordon@erols.com), October 25, 1999


[KOS: will you PLEASE go back to spelling your handle the RIGHT way?!?!?!?!?!?!]

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), October 25, 1999.

Regarding KOS's post...

Paula writes, "This seems to me to be a perfect, albeit strange, example of the uses of common sense. (It may also be therapeutically humorous for anyone with a really strange sense of humor, who has been immersed in the subject of Y2K for much too long a period of time.)

Obviously, Dr. Gordon is exceptionally bright, insightful and an excellent judge of character and personality. She pegged ol' KOS, didn't she?

The Paula Gordon Credibility Index just went up through the roof : )

Mike...reading on...


-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), October 25, 1999.

Thanks Paula for your help in trying to get the word out.

Please don't forget to CYA when TSHTF. DC will be no place to be come January.

-- nothere nothere (notherethere@hotmail.com), October 25, 1999.

Hmmm. In Part 5 she used my survey, in Part 6 she uses KOS's post, I wonder if she'll be interviewing Andy for Part 7?

-- a (a@a.a), October 25, 1999.

Can't seem to connect to the link...is the address correct? Thanks.

-- David John (djcon@bellsouth.net), October 25, 1999.

There's gonna be no keepin' him down on the farm now!

-- flora (***@__._), October 25, 1999.

The frigging link is dysfunctional!!???!!!! Gawd!

I finally tracked it down at www.gwu.edu/~y2k/keypeople/gordon/part6.html

And there is nothing "humorous" about what I said. Someone asked a perfectly good question that required an exceptional amount of technical expertise, and I was glad to provide a comprehensive and cost effective solution. I can only hope that it is not misused, now that it has been publicized to the world at large.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 25, 1999.

snicker, snicker!

-- A Much Hated Troll (whoLUVSit@when.theidiotshelpthe"cause"...LOL!), October 25, 1999.

and again, snicker, snicker!

-- A Much Hated Troll (thankU@thankU.THANKU!), October 25, 1999.

If you have ANY sense of humor at all, you gotta find at least a little humor in the fact that Paula Gordon has included "King of Spain's" pseudo-email address: "madrid@aol.cum"


-- CD (not@here.com), October 25, 1999.


Therapeutic Doomer outburst, anti-gag reflex, the world is tilting!

Oooooo, Paula, you still dare to go one-on-one and try to speak to Koffinsky? His reptilian forked tongue might spurt inky-veil common-sense paralyzing venom spin on your crystalline logic! RUN!

Koffinsky is a dumb lawyer stooge for The Naked Emperor. An effigy blowing in the ponderous pendulum winds of cataclysmic history. Pay no mind to the lawyer lip flapper behind the iron-fisted curtain! Beware his tranquilizing mesmer-meme of Happy Face anesthesia. Do not let him contaminate your person, thoughts, perceptions, intuitive grasp of the Big Picture.

Save yourself, Dr. Gordon!

For the rest of Yourdynamites who want to lose their lunch, Paula's latest is here:

Part 6: "De Nile Ain't Just a River in Egypt"

Dr. Gordon, have you read this thread yet? [Thanks, Old Git!] More embedded doom based on good ole cold reason and technical reality:

Taskforce 2000: Embedded Systems

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), October 25, 1999.

To give Koslinky credit, he probably sleeps about as well as we do.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), October 25, 1999.

Thank you Senior King...for the link, your tech expertise and jumping to my defense (a mere chief...estimator)

-- David John (djcon@bellsouth.net), October 25, 1999.

Excellent article -- although I expected it to be a little more informative about mudwrestling.

-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), October 25, 1999.

Gotta confess. It rambled and had no punch line.

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), October 25, 1999.

C'mon you guys, and Paula, too. You all give Kosky too much credit, pay too much attention to him. Which is exactly why he was hired for the job. He's a MOUTH, a talking head, a puppet. And he's been told quite clearly just exactly what he may or may NOT say in most situations. But I could almost hear his circuits shorting out in that conversation with Paula.!! It would be funny if the larger implications weren't so criminal. Kosky's biggest success has been his ability to keep Americans (including us GIs) from focusing on the real culprit, our esteemed leader.

In spite of my opinion of Kosky, the start of that chapter is good, Paula. Forces one back to basic, plain-thinking.

-- cat (ccordes@ashland.baysat.net), October 25, 1999.

For those of you who don't feel like following the link, but are dying to know what the K of S said, here is the excerpt:

How do you know the difference between Y2K and EMP?

An extraordinary response to this question was as follows:

"Get yourself an early microwave oven that does not (have) embedded chips. Buy a generator that is Y2K compliant. Plug the microwave oven into the generator. On New Year's eve, start the generator. If the lights go out, see if the microwave oven will work. If it does, its Y2K; if it does not, its EMP."

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 05, 1999.

Personally, I felt there were much more humorous and "common sense" contributions from his majesty that Dr. Gordon could have used. But you gotta hand it to her for putting in the time that she does.

-- semper paratus (always@ready.now), October 25, 1999.

Any chance you could drop the browser-choking subject lines? There's a perfectly good text box to use to enter your actual message, there's no reason to write a book in the *subject* line.

To those who choose to disregard that bit of common sense advise, here's a little ego-buster for you: when you create an epic subject line, chock full of a variety of punctuation marks, you make it nearly impossible -- short of herculean efforts -- for many readers to bookmark the thread.

-- Ron Schwarz (rs@clubvb.com.delete.this), October 25, 1999.

Hey all, lighten up on Koskinen. I mean, makes perfect sense to me to hire a lawyer to head up your Y2K efforts. After all, who else would you hire? An engineer who knows something about the actual problem? Bwahahahahahah.

-- just another (another@engineer.com), October 25, 1999.

Gawd! Refusing to apply common sense to the Embedded System problem. What is Kosky smoking, with ALL of 37 Federal Days 'till the Roll??

In retrospect, the use of Intel PC compatible CPUs will be seen as the blunder that it is..."Maskable" interrupts??? Well, what mask was the interrupt wearing when Van Nuys spewed??

-- K. Stevens (kstevens@ It's ALL going away in January.com), October 26, 1999.


Enjoying your adoring fan club?

"Electrical engineers apply common sense along with technical expertise all the time. Indeed you have to use common sense to figure out why things went wrong and how they can be repaired."

WRONG. You have to put aside "common sense" and draw on the ability to comprehend that which you cannot "see" with your eyes, but through your training and experience and a form of logic that is learned as apposed to that which you have through your senses. Basic common sense is useless in electronics. It is by its nature an understanding that is gained by putting aside basic common sense. Otherwise your mind would be in constant conflict with what it perceives vs what it logically analyses

Common sense says that big, heavy aircraft sitting on the runway that you are about to board should not be able to be able to fly through the air. If common sense had not been questioned and disproved then there would be no aircraft. Knowledge and education and the logic of aerodynamics made flight possible. Common sense is "common". 100 years ago common sense dictated man would not walk on the moon.

Koskinen bypasses the "common idea (oops sense)" that you attempt to force on him, because his perception of the situation is different than yours due to the fact that he is (now) more educated on the subject and has people with the education, knowledge, logic and EXPERIENCE with which to draw his conclusions from. Why should he would consider what you have to say (again and again after hearing it once) when you have no qualifications to define that which you believe is common sense? When what you have to say is nothing more than "data" that is gathered in casual conversations and on the web pages of others who are almost all as unqualified as you are on the subject of "embedded systems and chips"?

Common sense would appear to dictate that what I (with my experience) say about embeddeds should be believed over what you (with your data gathering without comprehension) have to say.

Common sense dictates that perceptions can not change the laws of physics.

Common sense also dictates that there are people who need to believe what you have to say over anything I say for any number of psychological and/or emotional reasons.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), October 26, 1999.

Cherri, common sense says that you are the DITSYest scatterbrain that has EVER posted on this forum. You seem to have trouble keeping track of your own rambling thoughts, much less being able to share them with anyone else and have them make a lick of sense.

But don't get me wrong, they always bring a smile. Please keep posting them.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 26, 1999.

Koffinsky, waggling the finger: "I refuse to consider common sense with that woman, Ms. Gordon."


-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), October 27, 1999.


I have to agree that by not telling the public, the administration and elected officials cannot judge the will of the electorate. It's bad juju.

Sysop, can someone post this thread on the main board again? It disappeared too quickly, due to many posts.

-- Mara (MaraWayne@aol.com), October 27, 1999.

Cherri needs to go back(?) to the kitchen...

-- Start cooking (wisdom@Bible.God), October 27, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ