Lessons That I've Learned From Y2K

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

I've learned a few lessons from Y2K:

1. People in general no longer seem to know how to, or are no longer being taught how to do research.

2. People in general tend to use only sources of information that support their pre-conceived view of outcomes.

3. People in general will blast a source (in particular government and media) yet use them later as source material (See #2)

4. People in general are all too easily swayed by "experts"

5. People are all too ready to accept anonymous primary sources

6. People are all too ready to accept anonymous secondary sources (primary sources quoting an anonymous source)

7. People in general are all to ready to believe that someone is conspiring against them (us, you - whatever)

When the next big issue comes along I hope that we can all have our collective heads on just a bit straighter than we did on this issue. In particular I'd hope that the next "Scary Gary" won't be hailed as a hero and believed simply because he or she walks-the-walk, talks-the-talk and sounds good (though loud) on paper. Scary Gray had an agenda that had nothing to do with software. Far, far too many people bought into his pseudo-intellectual line. Scary Gary wasn't much different than LL - he just had more believers.

He's moved on now, but he's going to archive his site. Go back sometime and take a critical look at his conclusions. See if you can find any analysis worthy of a person who holds a PhD. (Actually, see if you can find any analysis at all.) If you had any Email contact with him wherein you disagreed with him in any way look back at it. Did he insist that you were a fool and would soon be dead? In my case he insisted that I was "A dead man, whining."

I've learned a few things from Y2K...very little of what I learned had anything to do with software.

-- Darby (DarbyII@AOL.com), January 11, 2000

Answers

Would that be Darby O'Gill??

-- Porky (Porky@in.cellblockD), January 11, 2000.

Tee Hee ... Oh, Porky, no. Darby a is Celt, but not a Gael.

-- Darby (DarbyII@AOL.com), January 11, 2000.

8. People who draw general conclusions about people based on the 1% who thought Y2K might be more than a bump in the road are at high risk of being wrong in their conclusions.

When the next big issue comes along I hope that we can all have our collective heads on just a bit straighter than we did on this issue." Is that the Royal We, or would this sentence be better executed in the first person?

-- (TrollPatrol@sheesh.now), January 11, 2000.


Actually, the overwhelming majority of the public made no attempt to do any research whatsoever.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), January 11, 2000.

I agree with TrollPatrol, Darby.

This forum hardly consists of people in general. Think of yourself as an anthropologist when you're here, observing a strange, irrational but small tribe. Those actually capable of independent thought and actual research didn't hang out here, unless they just happened to enjoy the inevitable kneejerk reactions to rational thought. And had very thick skins.

In any case, Gary North was never doing analysis. His output was (by his own admission) intended as propaganda in support of entirely separate motivations.

And y2k has one thing going for it -- the outcome is far more unambiguous than I expected. A clear first-round knockout. And being spectacularly wrong won't induce anyone here to question their many and various other fantasies. This is NOT the real world.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 11, 2000.



Bravo Darby and Flint....if Y2K provided anything...it was material for "live and learn". And...reality supports or refutes theories...regardless if any here or elsewhere refuse to admit the facts they observe clearly. Y2K did not and will not bring about TEOTWAWKI. Any bugs that do crop up will be squashed by hordes of programmers like me. As long as basic infrastructure held, the outcome was certian. All theories about accounting errors at month end, leap year, quarter or whatever resulting in serious disruptions are bogus -- summary reports, accounting stuff, ect -- does NOT SHUT DOWN THE WORLD IF BUGGY!! Many need to face the facts that TWAWKI continues...and will continue to continue -- period.

Sincerely,

-- programmer (codeslinger@home.now), January 11, 2000.


Sort of off-topic, but Greil Marcus (music critic) once found himself on an assignment where he was supposed to do an article on some at-large UFO sightings. He said during the course of the assignment he soon realized that the whole UFO phenomenon had much more to do with human psychology than any form of science, history or conspirational activity. No ET's around these parts, just strangely compelling ET fans who would/could not give up the ghost.

Kinda like this forum.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), January 11, 2000.


Darby -

re: Scary Gary...

Having both benefited & suffered by his sharp words, I have some observations.

Folks like North have been selling the end of the world since the beginnings of time. Normally they live quitely at the fringes. But what happened over the past 5 years was the the moderate center was caught with it's facts down. There was a vacuum in the moderate center and extremists like North gladly filled it with their apocalyptic rethoric.

From what I could sense, lots of folks simply couldn't see North's hidden agenda. He's been in the business of picking up something & virtually always putting the worst possible spin on it.

I'm sure Herr Goebbels would have been highly envious of North's ability to always find a dark cloud.

On the other hand he did serve a very valid purpose in being an absolutely tireless clipping service.

In conclusion... Y2K was about the long standing human habit (well embedded long before computers came on the scene) of using two digits to represent year. Mixing run-of-the-mill apocalyptic/Rapture/End Times/Millennial Madness in the Y2K stewpot was simply either malicious intent or genius, depending on how you want to look at it.

Personally, I'm far happier that it appears that most software issues seem to have been at least adequately addressed to keep them out of the public eye. It's unfortunate that than Millennial nonsense got mixed into the sauce, but given the magic round number, such a mix was probably unavoidable.

-- David Eddy (deddy@davideddy.com), January 11, 2000.


The important thing you are overlooking is that there never was much credible evidence to support either position. Most of us would have preferred to base our analysis on credible evidence, but it wasn't there. I still have no strong opinion on how it will play out due to the lack of information. If good information is not available, one has no choice but to try to make some judgements using whatever information they can find, even if it can't be verified.

-- Danny (dcox@ix.netcom.com), January 11, 2000.

Thank you all for your responses to this post.

TrollPatrol: your point #8 is well received. I was aware as I posted that I ran the risk of using a very broad brush. I didn't intend to finger just doomers. The point applies to doomers, pollys and total-disconnects.

However, a lot of what I learned applies directly to this forum. It got very old reading a whistle blower bad news report from an anonymous "insider(s)", especially when they would quote yet another anonymous source, working for an anonymous business or agency who would fall back on the tired cliche, "I cannot disclose my source, my name, the name of the business due to non-disclosure agreements."

Evaluating intelligence data requires that the source of the data also be evaluated (verifiable training, knowledge, experience, reliability, past reliability). Far, far too few insiders took the high road and disclosed. There's a reason why courts put strict limits on hearsay testimony and rarely allow "confidential sources" to go unidentified at trial: such testimony is inherently unreliable and rarely verifiable.

-- Darby (DarbyII@AOL.com), January 12, 2000.



* * * 20000112 Wednesday

Lessons I've learned from Y2K:

1. It doesn't matter that 2-digit dates sort incorrectly. (Vendors produced/sold utilities/patches for nothing.)

2. It doesn't matter that 2-digit dates compute (+/-) incorrectly. (Date "horizons" and flakey results were imagined.)

3. It doesn't matter that February 29, 2000 is a valid day/date. (Banksters/Brokers/Investors shouldn't be so "fussy.")

4. It doesn't matter that "windowed" 2-digit dates corrupt history. (Property and birth/death dates compute "imagined" results.)

5. It doesn't matter that SW vendors quit supporting product. (Why go to any effort to protect revenues and names?)

6. It doesn't matter that U.S. Military "trashed" 1/3rd of systems. (They "imagined" the stuff wouldn't work post-1999.)

7. It doesn't matter that corporations replaced K's of PC's. (Nothing better to do with revenues; stockholders take note.)

8. It doesn't matter that health providers tossed K's of devices. (Doctors/Patients beware.)

9. It doesn't matter that college aid funds were delayed for months. (Trumped up "computer glitches" padded institutional pockets.)

10. It doesn't matter that security systems became inoperable. (Who needs them anyway?)

11. It doesn't matter that assembly/manufacturing lines failed. (DCX, GM, and Ford don't need these.)

... ad nauseum ...

I've learned a few things from Y2K, too... Facts and events don't matter for justifying all the Y2K work that was "needlessly" done. What did software have to do with it? ...

{SIGH!}

Regards, Bob Mangus

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus1@yahoo.com), January 12, 2000.


Bob,

Believe me when I say that your points were never lost on me. Y2K is and will continue to be a serious and very expensive problem. "Windowing" was the biggest clue for me. Lots of business and government entities simply threw in the towel and cheated - a short term fix that's guaranteed to come back and bite them in the butt.

I still believe that my non-software observations are valid.

-- Darby (DarbyII@AOL.com), January 12, 2000.


I have learned a bucket-full from y2k:

1) How this country operates and functions,

2) How vulnerable our country is to ANYthing disrupting the flow of goods and services,

3) How needless it will be to warn my countrymen of any future threats, since they will do little or nothing as a result.

4)How sad it is that most folks do not CARE that our country is so very vulnerable to being attacked; any disruption in the flow of goods will result in needless deaths and suffering,

5)How unpopular being self-reliant is; apparently, this appears to be a threatening activity. Possibly a populace that is prepared, is one that may well resist intimidation and manipulation by the POWERS THAT BE?!,

6)That our country has no civil defence program, and appears to care less!,

7) That JIT delivery is not perceived as a grave threat to national security!,

8)That our gov. and industryleaders now have a PROVEN methodology for the next national crisis. Use the media to shame people who are preparing. Set up and then debunk Straw man arguements, such as planes will fall from the sky.

9)I also have learned that many folks who prepared would rather waste time examining why they were wrong, rather than why they were ever unprepared in the first place!

10) I learned that my country is comprised of a majority of people that take our freedoms for granted.All is fine if you pursue your frivilous passions and fads; BUT, should you take responsibility for your own well-being, then prepare to be labelled "paranoid".

Yes, y2k has given me quite an education about who my fellow-citizens are. In the coming years, my fellow-citizens may well acquire a very acute appreciation for the price of complacency; they will raise sons and daughters for sacrifice upon battlefields. Only in their weeping and tears will they begin to appreciate how we took so much for granted! As they visit their loved ones in a veterans hospital for years on end, they will finally get a clue as to the sacrifices of year's past that allowed them a few years to pursue their present follies!!

For those who are prepped, stay prepped! You are the only Civil Defence plan this country presently has!! Steer clear of meditating upon your NAVELS! Rather, be grateful you are now prepared for the sudden crises yet to come! y2k was the anomaly of crises! We never will get a 2 year lead time to prepare---EVER! What occurs as a national crisis from this point forward, will be a quick and sudden experience. There will be no forums to consult. You will either be prepared, or hurting! So, take care and stay ever ready!!!

Oh yeah...almost forgot! I also learned that according to bankers, no matter what occurs, including nuclear annihilation, or the Return Of Jesus Christ.... the SAFEST PLACE FOR MY MONEY IS in their sad little banks.

I also learned that one can "lose their lunch" over many things appearing in print!

Stay PREPARED!!!!

-- (He Who) Rolls with Punches (JoeZi@aol.com), January 12, 2000.


Rolls with Punches:

You provide such a wonderful object lesson for all of us. Your argument is:

Proposal: That we are extremely sensitive to the slightest problems.

Observation: We've suffered literally umpteen millions of computer bugs, in everything and everywhere, within a relatively short time, and you need a magnifying glass to notice even the most trivial difficulties. These massive computer problems have deflected our normal course about as much as a mosquito on the windshield.

Conclusion: We are extremely sensitive to the slightest problem!

As I wrote above, this is a forum for the reality-challenged. Thank you for demonstrating -- an outsider just can't describe True Blindness like the Truly Blind can.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 12, 2000.


Oh dear, I think you've all missed the point that the vast majority of the population (who did nothing) also correspond to this pattern.

"People in general tend to use only sources of information that support their pre-conceived view of outcomes". That applies to Joe Sixpack believing Stacey Implants on CNN when she tells him that All Is Well.

Just because the claims of Big Business have (to date) turned out to be mostly true doesn't mean that they were credible BEFORE rollover.

Oh sorry, that's maybe a bit complicated.

-- Servant (public_service@yahoo.com), January 12, 2000.



Rolls with Punches: You provide such a wonderful object lesson for all of us. Your argument is:

Proposal: That we are extremely sensitive to the slightest problems.

Observation: We've suffered literally umpteen millions of computer bugs, in everything and everywhere, within a relatively short time, and you need a magnifying glass to notice even the most trivial difficulties. These massive computer problems have deflected our normal course about as much as a mosquito on the windshield.

Conclusion: We are extremely sensitive to the slightest problem!

Rolls with punches, I liked your list a lot. Flint, apparently Y2k was a non-event, you can stop harping on it now. Other countries are much better prepared than ours for things that actually do occur. Other countries stockpile everything from grain to potassium iodate. But just keep living in fantasy land where nothing can touch you. Have you given all your preps to the food bank yet? Or are you still arguing both sides of the coin?

-- Amy Leone (leoneamy@aol.com), January 12, 2000.


Amy, Thank you for your kind words. It always helps to know there is someone out there who can read and understand English. Thanks again! Regards,

-- (He Who) Rolls with Punches (JoeZi@aol.com), January 13, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ