The thing I really don't understand is why people can't see the interconnectedness of it all. I thought pattern recognition and outcome prediction was a measure of intelligence. I mean, I have spoken to several people in the IT industry - people who you would think would have some kind of "insider" knowledge of the whole thing and they STILL speak of it in terms of "boxed" events like , "Well, the banks might have a problem, but mostly we'll be okay" or "Okay, so we have to live without BLANK. So what?" I'm a smart girl. Always have been. But I don't think it is the limit of my intelligence to think that we can have across the board vulnerability and not think that a person should take precautions! I am so frustrated by this! It seems so obvious to me! I am NOT a rocket scientist!

-- Goombah (goombah@aol.com), May 27, 1999

Answers

Goombah,

You have actually hit on the *major* character difference between the Polly crowd and the Gloomer crowd. The Polly, denial folks, do not see any serious interconnected dangers, either within the good old USA or overseas. They see the problems as being only within the individual computer systems of an individual company or government. The don't see dangers of corrupt data from outside, or failed vendors/customers as being that big a deal. The Gloomer folks see things as connected everywhere, like a spider web, and after a few vital links break down, such as the oil supply, the whole web collapses. There it is.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), May 27, 1999.

Goombah,

Let me try to explain these people to you. About 20 or so years ago, while I was in college for my IT degree, I would see many people just not *GET* programming. They learned all the syntax, but just could *NOT* get the computers to do what they wanted. They were thinking inside a very very small box. In some weird strange way, I have always had the logic to compose beautiful code (at least that is what I have been told). The logic was always there for me, and it fits just like the perfect glove upon my hand.

Anyway, one day a good friend of mine was having a very hard time with a systems app class she was taking. I told her to try her best, and that one day the programming light would shine upon her and she would understand because it would suddenly all fall into place. I helped her for all that I could (short of doing her work for her), but she struggled along.

Years later we met again in Atlanta, after both moving our ways from graduation. She told me I was right, that one day the light shined on her, and she understood it all. It then and only then did programming seem logical to her. So you see... sometimes programmers know the syntax, but not the logic. They know the how, but not the why.

I guess, someday soon, the light will shine on them as well. (Or not shine if the electricity goes off... )

-- (cannot-say@this.time), May 27, 1999.

Goombah,

It's cuz they don't want to get it.

Somedays I don't want to get it either....

It's called delusional thinking. Now it may not be as bad as some say...no one knows. It may depend on your geographical location. I've seen some discomforting things in this part of the country...others have seen other discomforting circumstances in other parts of the country but we've never really seen much in this generation that was pervasively bad. Conceptually some may concede it may happen but then they brush it from their minds.

People want to go on with their day to lives without further thought even if it's stressful because it takes to much determination and energy to get out from their ruts.

I struggle with this and I get it. But I do what I can day by day and with God's help to prepare and pray I never need the preparations. For me I'm making lifestyle changes that I enjoy no matter what happens even it it does stretch me.

S-T-R-E-T-C-H = Growth!

-- texan (bullseye@ranch.com), May 27, 1999.

Problem is, It more important to be able to understand the "Effect" of the problem rather than the problem itself.

See, most programmers don't "see" the effect of a bug or error - they get an error report, re-program something, and re-compile the program. They aren't forced to to clean up the spilled acid off the floor (from a tank that overflowed) or reload a boxcar because the order form listed the wrong train delivery date or boxcar destination code sequence. They work in a clean little office environment - not the real world.

The above is a slight exaggeration - but true in the general picture. The result of the bug (Y2K or otherwise) isn't seen in the programmer's lap - so he or she isn't intuitively "aware" of it. Also, they (in genreal) aren't affected by sequential failures or cascading problems - as a personwho has assembly line or construction experience does.

A mathematician, for example, might be able to derive the formula for stress in a perfect hollow cylinder based on theorectical internal pressure right? But you'd never accept a pipe design from a PhD in mathematics - you'd tell an engineer to design it, sign the paper certifying it is safe, and can be properly fabricated - then you'd need a pipe fitter to cut it, weld it, test it, and flush it, and finally place it in service.

So can a mathematician or lawyer understand the water treatmetn plant - made up of 40,000 pipes and motors and sensors and flow instruments and computers and terminal boxes and manual regulators and high pressure tanks?

Only in theory - they has no sense of how long it takes to crawl around the 4 acre site trying to squint at pressure gages and adjust 1/4 inch feed valves on a scaffolding 25 feet up. To them, "we'll just use manual controls" is a real solution. To the foreman - it means 7 days a week 24 hours a day of nightmares and errors as his people try to keep up with the ever-changing demands.

Its the connections between things that count - each programmer (in general) doesn't know the results of his failures until he has gotten his hands dirty fixing them. Worse, the same is true of every other administrator out there. Particularly in the public administration world - they are (in general) even more isolated. It takes also a person who has multiple industry cross-training, a person who KNOWS exactly how often and in what ways computers fail due to program and hardware "goofs" - and how hard is to fix them, etc.

Combine a network administrator with anindustrial process designer with a chemical engineer with a plumber (or pipefitter) with a machinist with a power plant engineer with a programmer with a satellite designer with a telecom engineer with a banking programmer with a .... and you might find somebody who can "see" all the potential impacts of Y2K.

And even that person is going to be VERY surprised by what actually happens.

Be glad you have the talent to understand the links, the inquisitive nature not to ignore them, and the couragte to try to find out, and the wisdom to know there are experts in every field - and that the best of those experts also know enough to realize "they don't know" - but are willing to check it out and investigate..

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), May 27, 1999.

Macro = Doomer

Micro = Polly

Enough said?

-- FLAME AWAY (BLehman202@aol.com), May 27, 1999.

Baffling, isn't it? You just can't tell who's going to have the light- bulb go off over thier head and who won't. Education has nothing to do with it. Social class has nothing to do with it. Either people get it or they don't. Alot of DGI is denial, but not always. Some just can't see it. Like those posters that have the hidden picture in them. Some people look at it and exclaim, "Wow, it's a rabbit". Others take the darn thing home with them and finally just throw it out. When it's someone you really love and care about, it starts out frustrating and eventually becomes devastating. For me, this has been far more exhausting than the physical labor of preparing. "Wait, wait....try standing at the other end of the room, and then look at it". "Ok, ok, what do you see if I turn it upside-down?" "No, no, don't worry about it, now stand on your head....what the hell is wrong with you? I can see it. She can see it. Put your sun glasses on, maybe THAT will help!" Makes me tired just thinking about it! I've run out of patience for this. "Just put this bucket of rice in your closet....trust me"

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), May 27, 1999.

Robert, PNG has paid you a very high compliment on the GM thread and you have demonstrated his excellent judgement on this one : )

Will Continue...rofl...I've had more days like that then I care to think about!

Goombah, sometimes I think the perception of intelligence is something people rely too heavily on. Give me logic and the practical application of knowledge any day over the perception of intelligence.

Mike ===============================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), May 27, 1999.

Goombah:

Many of us do see the interconnectedness of our life support systems. I recognized the vulnerability of say, Los Angeles, many years back. Without outside water, food, gasoline, and electricity, LA simply cannot support the number of people who live there. Here on Kauai, we import most of our food, all of our gasoline, most of the fuel for our electric generation, all of our tourists (the biggest part of our economy), and almost everything else. We are almost dependent upon the barges coming in once or twice a week.

Yet the sad fact is, some people never look seriously at their life support system beyond the most superficial level. They do not consider it important to understand the potential for disruption...until a disaster like a hurricane, tornado, flood, earthquake, major winter storm...or Y2K disrupts their lives. They may be the same ones that we used to see in the California mountains in winter...totally inappropriately dressed, without tire chains, and with no emergency gear. They can be the same ones who would rent a snowmobile and go blasting off into the wilderness...only to have it break down and strand them many miles from civilization...without any backup.

I suspect that some of us grew up with the ocean, mountain, desert, or at least the country as our home. In the mountains or desert, or on the ocean, you had better prepare, because they don't care whether you are prepared or not.

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), May 27, 1999.

Goombah here.

Well, thanks for all your considered responses! I guess like in all things, it's not just a matter of black or white - there are many factors at play. I for one have always been amazed that our complex world works - maybe I'm in a minority, but I have always thought that it was a helluva deal for me to get someone to carry a letter 3000 miles for 32 cents.

By the way, notable lack of Polly response, ainna?

-- Goombah (goombah@aol.com), May 27, 1999.

Complex adaptive systems are near impossible to model accurately. Too many chaotic interrelationships, too many changes, too many new variables popping up and old ones vanishing.

The usual "everything is connected" AHA experience falls well short of seeing enough of the overall picture to be useful. We see the interconnections, we can trace some of them for some distance, before the number of branchings exceed our grasp.

As a result, the more pessimistic tend to argue their position by means of the "want of a nail" sequences. The fundamental problem with this analysis is that if it were even slightly true, a modern economy wouldn't be workable at all. Because there are constant failures and breakdowns, many of them in key places. The "all is connected" theory would hold that these breakdowns would cripple the economy. We can even show how this happens in detail. Except in real life, it doesn't happen.

In practice, the "interconnectedness" pessimists are very much like the physicists who proved beyond doubt that a bumblebee can't fly. And it's true that a bumblebee can't fly very well, and slow motion photography shows it's very clumsy, rolls when it lands, bangs into things, etc. But it flies, it flies!

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), May 27, 1999.

Hi, Goombah:

I guess I can speak for SOME of the pollys on this forum, as I'm sure that's how most of you see me.

I haven't concluded my research into the interconnectedness of it all and (frankly), I'm UNWILLING to simply accept someone else's word.

Let's take Italy (for example.) I've been there five times. The elevators didn't work when I was there, the heat didn't work when I was there. The country is for the most part agrarian...LOTS of beautiful country-side where olives and grapes abound.

Rome's gonna have some problems if all the folks flock to the Vatican for the millenium (as reported by some media folks.) Rome has problems NOW! [If you go, PLEASE ensure that you keep your passport tightly wrapped somewhere INSIDE your clothing.] Venice is pretty much a dirty town surrounded by a dirty canal. The people are poor already. They do NOT rely on technology to survive. Naples is pretty much already controlled by roving bands of thieves. Sorry if I'm stereotyping here, but I remember asking the guy at the hostel in Naples if it was safe to go out after dark. His response was: "No...but not safe in daytime either."

Okay...I've said my piece on Italy. THEIR breakdown will mean that the U.S. doesn't receive ceramics, Italian olive oil, and Italian grapes and wine. Actually I forgot the other items we import from Italy, because they were inconsequential.

Now I ADMIT that I like Italian Olive Oil, and even today purchased more for the cache. I'm NOT fond of their grapes, nor am I fond of their wine. Their government is socialist, as I'm sure you're aware, so they have the typical problems already associated with THAT.

I'm moving on with my research, one country at a time, but I won't accept this "We're all dependent on each other." concept until I prove it to MYSELF. YOU may choose to believe the words of others, but I'm uh...from MISSOURI? [Not really...I'm from Texas, but you get my point, right?]

There was a poster on the c.s.y2k forum recently who stated that she was moving along with her cache purchases to include imported items...such as shoe-strings. I had to laugh, as I've NEVER worn out the strings that came with a pair of shoes before I wore out the shoes.

No...you DON'T have to be a rocket-scientist, but I suspect more independent research might help you separate the grain from the chaff.

My personal opinion on Y2k is to determine how our community will be affected FIRST...then move on to our city in general, then move on to our state, then move on to our country, and then move on to dependencies we have on overseas goods. Of COURSE these things will intertwine in the interim....oil production certainly will hit us in our communities FIRST, right?

Just my opinions.

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), May 27, 1999.

I've been asking how do you conclude the end of the world from Y2K and no one seems to answer. Thanks for starting this thread. When I first asked the question the responses came back, "Oh, I was in the grocery store", or "I was driving when it hit me", or some other kind of revelation anecdote. (reminds me of an evangelical movement) Not one person could logically go through the path to the end. Now I too understand what you mean about getting it in terms of programming, mathematics, and yes those posters but just saying that it's interconnected doesn't do it for me. Yeah ok it's interconnected like a web but breaking the links of the web doesn't bring down the web. So what you're saying now is that it can't be explained?

Your last post points out it's a complicated world we live in, no shit. It's also very "duplicated"; for each path you go down, there are many more paths that will lead to the same destination. You've forgotten the we have a brain to think through problems and solve them.

Please just explain your logic in reaching your conclusions. Give it a try without using the word interconnected and systemic.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 27, 1999.

Maria

Think real hard. Is it possible to break enough links in a spider web faster than the spider can repair them? If so, might the whole web be ruined to the point where it's useless? I'll even concede that most of the web could be undamaged. The spider will still have to start over from scratch. All it takes is enough of the critical links to break. That's the concept you don't get.

-- Doug (douglasjohnson@prodigy.net), May 27, 1999.

Doug:

You seem to be saying that programmers will continue writing y2k bugs faster than they can fix them. I doubt many programmers are doing this anymore (I certainly *hope* not).

This means that as we continue to fix these bugs, we're winning the battle. And although many of them won't be fixed, or fixed properly, before they strike, there's nowhere to go but up. Fortunately, y2k bugs don't breed. So each one fixed is one less to bite us.

There is, of course, the possibility that so many serious bugs will be missed that some sort of critical mass will be reached, and the web will collapse. This is the Infomagic theory, now falling further out of favor each day as new reports come in of successes here and there.

Of course, then you could argue that we aren't seeing nearly enough success stories. And this is true, we'd prefer to see many more than we're seeing. But no news is good news in a way -- it isn't much of a story to report that things are "same as it ever was."

Also, I think testing follows a pretty sharp curve. The first few tests show up the real howlers almost immediately. If you've done a reasonably competent remediation job, you can probably weed out the real killers you missed within a month or two. Unusual cases (seldom- used logic paths) will continue to haunt us, probably for the rest of our lives. I expect computer errors to become much more of a fact of life for some time than they are now.

Most of this testing is going on behind the scenes, but it's happening. The biggies are being eliminated.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), May 27, 1999.

Sorry Doug, you failed the test. Define "enough of the critical". And why haven't you considered the alternate paths? Again try not to do a lot of hand waving here. (BTW, want to know more about the Russians coming?)

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 27, 1999.

The biggies are being eleminated? Name just ONE, please. If anything is being eleminated....it's the punies. Not that it matters...one well placed punie could bring a biggie to it's knees. Whatever (Valley girl accent).

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), May 27, 1999.

Sorry. "eliminated". brain to hand problems.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), May 27, 1999.

For those of us on this forum that have had some programming experience (ie COBOL, Pascal, and C), it is easy to see that changing one little thing can effect the operation of the whole program and not all of the problems show up immediately. Of course, not all of the newly introduced problems will escape detection, but of those that do, several will be debilitating. From what I have seen, the spiderweb analogy is appropriate.

-- cw (cwiowa@uiowa.edu), May 27, 1999.

Warning -- The Debunkers and their Memebuster friends are massing to disinfect us memes again. No? Okay, look at this post made by a major Boonkah player this afternoon at Der Boonkah -- is it a call to arms, or what?

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb237006&MyNum=9 27830917&P=Yes&TL=927824470

Debunking Y2k webboard

NEW TOPIC: LETS END THE "NO BODY KNOWS" MYTH WITH "WHAT WE KNOW NOW"

Thursday, 27-May-1999 14:48:37

151.164.57.51 writes:

LETS FORGET THIS "WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN".

LETS ASK WHAT DO WE KNOW THAT WILL WORK.

THEN ASK: "WHAT ARE **THEY** PREPARING FOR??"

The former "Iron Triangle" of North/Yourdon/rest WILL NOT FAIL.

FACT OR FICTION??

1. POWER. They started early 1998 with the Grid will fail. Then it was one of the 3 grids will fail. Now its "isolated shortages".

QUESTION: Where??

So we know that for the vast majority: there will be POWER.

2. Telcos. Power companies and everyone depend on the Telcos which depend on Power. See one above and the statements of the Telco industry.

QUESTION: does anyone know a Telephone Company that will fail?? Answer: WHERE IS THE DATA showing ANY??

3. The BANKS. MYTH ONE: was North and Yourdon's "not enough time to fix. Well it turns out there WAS ENOUGH TIME.

So now comes Myth TWO: banks will fail because of RUNS the BAnks. BUT, the Fed is not too stupid. They now have enough cash to provide a MIN. of $7,000 per household in the US.

CASH. Which inspired one Fed Reserve official to say, "let them run on a bank we are ready for them".

In reality, The average savings per cap. in DEMAND deposits is about $600;head. With the mythical American family of 2.5 thats: $1,500. DOUBLE THAT FOR SAFETY: Say the household has $3,000 in *** demand ** accounts that must be paid on the spot. That is worst case. In reality, 1/2 of the households in the US HAVE NO SAVINGS AND LIVE WEEK TO WEEK. BUT, even at $3,0000 the FED has: $7,000/household.

SOURCE: (FOR DOOMERS): FED.RESERVE BANK (DALLAS) SPOKESPEOPLE AT A DFW/DAMA meeting.

THAT's TWICE.........worst case to fund ALL THE RUNS ON ALL THE BANKS IS IT NOT?????

So, we know the banks would be in business, charge cards work, ATMs work, Telephones will work and POWER WILL BE ON.

WHAT ARE YOU "PREPARING FOR"????????

A DOOM ZOMBIE BULL s--- STORY ON AN INTERNET FORUM???

cpr

(End quote)

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), May 27, 1999.

Maria and Anita,

If, as Will Continue stated, you just can't see the rabbit in the picture, then you can't. Surely you've been up against that kind of problem before. To say that it isn't there, just because you can't see it, is not good reasoning. Everyone I have ever known who could not see something that others were seeing became frustrated about it. Again, as Will Continue stated, just put the rice in the closet, and trust us. :-) PS, before you go buggy about what we are saying on this forum, why not read that US Navy War College paper, for starters, and ponder why *they* would think this is a big, big, deal too? And then, try to resist the temptation to say, "I still can't see it, therefore it doesn't exist."

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), May 27, 1999.

Gordon:

And then, try to resist the temptation to say, "I still can't see it, therefore it doesn't exist."

I never said interdependencies didn't exist. *I* simply stated that I must explore the situation myself and come to my own conclusions. Do you have a problem with folks doing this? Sorry, but I won't take YOUR word for it nor anyone else's word for it. I'm a fairly good researcher and didn't spend all those years taking logic at University to not be able to draw my OWN conclusions. I'm not a lazy, spoon-fed person, you see, Gordon. I WORK for my information.

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), May 27, 1999.

Maria:

I'll take a swing at that. I completely agree that our system has multiple redundancies. I have no doubt that, no matter how bad glitches become, we will work through them. Eventually.

That said, not all areas of all systems are equally resilient. There are many "choke points".

I live in Michigan, and saw several businesses go bankrupt last summer due to the GM shutdown. Bad luck for them. In my state, the "Big 3" are a choke point. If auto sales suffer due to consumers cutting spending plans, if there should be any supply problems or Y2K related problems that slow or stop auto production for any serious length of time (say over 6 months), we will be seriously hurting in my state. Regardless of how the rest of the country is doing.

In the transportation industry, diesel fuel is a choke point. If it rises even up to price levels similar to those much of the world is used to paying, it will drive quite a number of businesses under. The Free Market at work, and I would not have it any other way. But still, consumers without income and companies scrambling to find alternatives, quite possibly more expensive, and the bankrupt companies trying to collect their recievables from the failed firms.

Chemicals are another choke point. Due to consolidation, according to industry groups a number of suppliers are near to or virtually the sole sources for some of the commodities they produce. The downstream effects of losing an "obscure" but critical chemical or precusor could resemble the pebble that starts an avalanche. Or not. That is the uncertainty.

I'm sure that together we could all come up with a number of other examples of economic vulnerability which do not depend on the breakdown of a hypothetical arachnid's domocile.

Again, as I stated at the start, we will pull through this. We survived the Great Depression. We recovered from the fall of the Roman Empire. Humans are TOUGH. I simply choose to extend my efforts to reduce possible discomfort or even danger to my family during the recovery stage.

-- Jon Williamson (pssomerville@sprintmail.com), May 27, 1999.

Anita,

I have watched your posts and I can see you are an honest, quality, sort of person. Truly. However, you are telling me that you will not take the word of others on important matters, but must figure it out for yourself. That's called "reinventing the wheel" and you don't have enough time during the rest of your life to do that. If you want to see a simple story about this predicament, try getting ahold of a copy of a book titled "Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance." It's not about motorcycle maintenance at all. But it does pose an impossible dilemma, which is that every question you ask will always lead to *at least* two more questions. Before you know it, you are lost in the search.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), May 27, 1999.

It seems to me that for anybody to KNOW what's going to happen would require:

A. A truly encyclopedic knowledge of IT spanning the past 30 or 40 years.

B. Formidable skills in global macroeconomic forecasting.

C. Mastery of mass psychology (for the whole panic question).

D. The ability to marry these disparate fields of knowledge into a workable predictive model.

I think that pretty much narrows it down to God, and I don't think He's posting on this or any forum.

Just a little confidence-builder for everyone. ;-)

-- Thinman (thinman38@hotmail.com), May 27, 1999.

Gordon:

However, you are telling me that you will not take the word of others on important matters, but must figure it out for yourself. That's called "reinventing the wheel" and you don't have enough time during the rest of your life to do that.

In this case, Gordon, I have more time than money.

But it does pose an impossible dilemma, which is that every question you ask will always lead to *at least* two more questions. Before you know it, you are lost in the search.

Yep...I've encountered THAT also. However, I feel it more important to continue on in the research of the *at least* two more questions than honoring the opinion of someone who may not have had the time nor the inclination to research as completely as I.

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), May 27, 1999.

Anita and Thinman, some people just refuse to trust thier instincts, like a first-time mother, who is constantly seeking reasurance from relatives and calling the Pediatrician's office and looking things up in "The Parent's Manual". Some people just don't have any instincts or have lost touch with them for whatever reasons. I happened to have "seen the rabbit" and coupled with MUCH research made some plans. I've had many doubts off and on, about the facts and the research.....but NEVER have doubted my instinct. I have the most beautiful son and magnificent daughter and I'm blessed with a true soul-mate. I'm going with my gut feeling and I'm not looking back. I pitty anyone who wouldn't do the same. That is MY decision. That's just how very much I care, that's all. I also feel very passionately about my country....I've lived in others. There are some things I'm not willing to risk being wrong about. Y2K is one of them. How about you?

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), May 27, 1999.

Flame,

Macro and Micro. Love the analogy. Wonder how many of debunkies ever took a course on the macro economy.

-- R. Wright (blaklodg@hotmail.com), May 28, 1999.

Anita: "They do NOT rely on technology to survive."

Really? Where does their food come from? Drinking water? How do they earn money and where do the goods they buy come from? I've never been to Venice, but I suspect that they need technology as much as anyone here does. Many people don't need technology, at least the computer/embedded chip level of technology which I assume you meant, to get water and food. I don't. But I'd be surprised if many people in Venice are that independent.

I need technology to earn money. Without money I'd be in trouble even with my food and water.

It isn't a question of surviving w/o technology. We have it and will have it. It's only a question of how well it will work.

My environmentalist parents always said "the environment is like a punch bowl, if there is a turd one part of it then you don't want to drink from another part either". Economics works about the same. If Wall Street is screwed then we are all screwed whether we have money in it or not and whether we live in Venice or sub-Saharan Africa. Proximity plays a major part, but nobody is immune. Y2K is going to be a big turd in the global economic punch bowl. No matter where you drink from it, it's still going to spoil the punch.

-- Gus (y2kk@usa.net), May 28, 1999.

Will continue, looks like you go with your gut feeling more than logic or fact. Thanks for your point of view.

Gordon, I never said "I still can't see it, therefore it doesn't exist." I've work Y2K since 1995. I know the technological and management problems associated with Y2K. I know it exists. What I want to know from Goombah (bad spelling by the way) is how you deduce the end. Please lead me through the logic. I'm not stupid; I understand complex math and physics as well as orbital mechanics and rocket science. I can't physically see lots of things in physics yet I understand and believe that they exist.

Jon, thanks for you thoughtful response. I like the analogy of choke points. I do understand them and found lots of them within networks. Can you take me back a few steps though. How does a year miscalculation make the choke points fail? How does this failure lead to the end?

I can draw an analogy to the body; lots of complex things working together to keep it running. Don't understand all the pieces and parts and abuse it a lot of times but somehow it recovers. Now when attacked by a cancer, try as it might, it can't recover. Are you guys saying that Y2K is similar to cancer? Sorry, I don't buy it. I've seen Y2K and it doesn't even need chemo to kill it, just some good management.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 28, 1999.

I dunno, but if I were doing country by country research, I'D start with the pacific Rim countries FIRST, and then gt to Western Europe.

Or maybe I'd get out the Commerce Dept's stats and start at the TOP of the list of percentages of import and export, rather than picking them out of a large hat.

Chuck

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), May 28, 1999.

Maria:

As I indicated, I was not discussing "THE END". Just another in our species long history of ups and downs. We will get over it. I am NOT trying to show how Y2K glitches can lead to an "Infomagic" scenario.

As for up or downstream effects, pick any of the examples. Then factor in your choice of any and/or all of the following:

A. Delays or outright failure of overseas supplies because of a company's production facilities being vulnerable to embedded chips or homegrown code, because of data loss/corruption due to unremediated code, or due to difficulties in the shipping industries (as documented by the US Coast Guard), International funds clearing, or Customs problems at either end.

B. Greatly increased costs of doing business due to the costs of manual workarounds, combined with a far greater error rate in using manual systems along with the new personnel needed to work them. Assuming you can find the people. We could lose a lot of companies that way. Again, free market at work, but it could end up with us losing a company or several here and there that are critical in more than one industry.

C. Projected (but of course not yet proven) oil shortfalls from overseas due to unremediated mainframe code (hard to ship stuff if you don't know what you have, where it is, who has ordered it, and what they are paying), problems with the ships themselves or with unloading in our ports (see above), or in our refineries.

Problems in any of these areas could and probably will run all across the board, from minor to local "showstoppers". Certainly, not all glitches will immediately cascade into broad shutdowns. Some to many will dampen out. Some to many will not.

Maria, I've wondered for some time. What industry (not company, just a broad classification) do you work in?

-- Jon Williamson (pssomerville@sprintmail.com), May 28, 1999.

Maria,typing with a blood-pressure cuff on, is quite difficult, but here goes. Nothing personal now, but MY theories are BASED upon logic....something you're not in touch with (from my point of view). You want FACTS and by the time you get them, something wicked this way CAME. Jon has just given you a brief and very good overview (left out legal intanglements not to mention insurance problems). The thing is, Maria, it's *JUNE 1999* and either Shit or get off the pot. That may not be very polished or phoo-phoo enough for some....but it works. Now, you and MANY others like you (some related to me) have just won my "UNCLE" award. Adios amigo

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), May 28, 1999.

my favorite analogy of possible y2k effects is the image of a beautiful stone bridge. we can afford to lose a few stones here and there, but there is a critical point at which the support loses its integrity and the whole arch collapses. what percent failure is that critical point? 5%, 10%, 15%? we don't know. it may be even higher, *as long as critical stones are not the ones falling/failing*. if those falling stones are labeled 'recreational activities,' 'tv sports,' etc., then we'll be okay, but the first one labeled 'major bank' will cause a problem.

anita, watch out for 'analysis paralysis,' a common enough problem. i personally trust your integrity more than i do other posters here, but sometimes you have to take another's word for the presence of the 'rabbit.' please don't neglect basic survival requirements, i want to hear from you again when we get the infrastructure back up and running.

i personally think recovery will take place in about 5 or so (i just don't know the unit of measure: hours; days; months; years . . . ).

-- Cowardly Lion (cl0001@hotmail.com), May 28, 1999.

Jon,

Those were very good examples of interconnected problems. If you were giving a course in finding these type connections, those would be fine starting points in honing one's ability to *see* the rabbit.

Will Continue,

You have hit on another excellent piece of advice. When in doubt, trust your intuition, your gut feelings. We have been told this many times in many ways, but some of us don't like that advice. Science, wonderful as it is, has seduced us into thinking that they hold *all* the answers, if we just look hard enough. Personal experience, as well as watching the ways of some "primitive cultures" teaches that science is grossly overrated. Intuition, for whatever mysterious reason, will beat scientific analysis, 4 times out of 5.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), May 28, 1999.

I'm going to try and quickly address some of these responses and then move on to more research.

Will continue: [First off, I thought for a LONG time that was less of a handle than an indication that this was your first post of two or three. *grin*] Instincts are good. My family even seems to have a strange ability to *see* things in dreams. My mom once woke up and told my dad that she'd had a dream that the car was stolen. Yep...the car HAD been stolen. I once had a dream that our home had been burglarized. Yep...our home HAD been burglarized. It's perhaps due to instinct that I've prepared for Y2k....or would that fall under your question of "Are you prepared to be wrong?"

R: As I recall, we had to take macro economics BEFORE we took micro economics at University.

Gus: In general, their food comes from local farmers. As I stated, the country is basically agrarian. Lots of the transportation I noticed consisted of pack-mules and boats (energy supplied by human sweat.) Sure, there are folks in the cosmopolitan areas who have adopted more Western ways...bathing frequently, and maybe even shopping at the few department stores in the cities. In general, however, the big food-chains, Wal-Marts, etc. are NOT a part of the culture...even in the cosmopolitan areas. I'm sure much of their income is based on tourism, as is true in resort cities of the U.S. I know I've over-generalized this response, Gus, and I KNOW people will be affected world-wide by Y2k just as people were affected world- wide by war. SOME businesses WILL fail either due to lack of tourists or other reasons. This is true in the U.S. also, and has been true all along.

Chuck: Your idea is a good one. I chose to begin my research with countries about which I knew something from personal experience...not to mention the countries that Mr. Milne presents as TOAST. [I confess that the order was not scientific.] Since I have experience in the oil industry, the concerns regarding petroleum sparked the same sortof knee-jerk response: "Wait just a minute here. I don't buy this one." Whenever I don't buy into an opinion, I feel compelled to research it until I find out the truth. I'm familiar with the Commerce Department's stats. That's where I began my research on Italy.

Thanks for all the opinions and tips.

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), May 28, 1999.

see the rabit,do not try,just do.relax...feel the force flowing to and from the rabit...let go...it's your attempt to see the rabit that is stopping the rabit from being evident

-- YODA (yoda@DAGOBA.COM), May 28, 1999.

Whhheeew, YODA, that's a good one..ROTFLMAO! Sheees, I can't stop snickering. I really do wish more people would inject some humor into this subject, and forum, more often! This subject just gets too serious sometimes. The day I stop laughing about "stuff" is the day you may as well just Nuke me!!!!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), May 28, 1999.

>>>I for one have always been amazed that our complex world works - maybe I'm in a minority, but I have always thought that it was a helluva deal for me to get someone to carry a letter 3000 miles for 32 cents. -- Goombah (goombah@aol.com), May 27, 1999. <<<

Goombah, letters cost 33 cents now. It is still a hell of a deal!

-- J (jart5@bellsouth.net), May 28, 1999.

Anita:

An area of food vulnerability that has increased in many countries comes from the widespread use of the Green Revolution "miracle grains", especially rice. Most increased food production in the Third World has come from this trend, according to my research.

These seeds, being hybrids, don't breed true, thus cannot be saved by the farmers. It also needs more fertilizers and pesticides to maintain the crop levels.

Transportation problems, chemical refinery problems, and just plain luck will all be considerable factors. How are you and Murphy's Law getting along these days?

-- Jon Williamson (pssomerville@sprintmail.com), May 28, 1999.

This response is for Jon:

First off, Jon, ever since I've seen your name I've wondered if you were the Jon Williamson for whom my mom babysat long ago in Chicago. You wouldn't have an older sister named Janis, would you?

"These seeds, being hybrids, don't breed true, thus cannot be saved by the farmers. It also needs more fertilizers and pesticides to maintain the crop levels."

This is an odd thing to say, John. I'm growing a garden without ONE ounce of fertilizer, nor one ounce of pesticide, and I can guarantee you that the stuff they call soil here in Texas resembles something more like a cross between sand, clay, and rock. I expected absolutely NOTHING to grow, and the whole backyard now abounds in growth (which I ALSO need to address today.) I'm ALSO seeing those hybrid $.10/pack seeds purchased from Hypermart SEEDING. I don't want to gloat here, but compare MY experience to Roland's. He chose the non-hybrid seeds and his beans have been basically destroyed, while I can barely keep up with picking mine.

"Transportation problems, chemical refinery problems, and just plain luck will all be considerable factors. How are you and Murphy's Law getting along these days?"

I'll be continuing my research into transportation, Jon. I, personally, know some contractors at Burlington Northern and they're software testing on a Y2k time machine. I'm more familiar with petroleum refineries than chemical refineries, but I'll include them in my research also.

Murphy's law has been in place ever since the earth began. [grin] My experience has shown that some folks simply live under a black cloud. My daughter's boyfriend is an example of that. If that kid didn't have BAD luck, he wouldn't have ANY luck at all.

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), May 28, 1999.

My analogy of the spider not being able to mend the critical parts of the web before the job becomes futile was meant to imply what will happen if and when mission-critical systems begin to fail, not the re-introduction of new Y2K bugs.

Our current way of life could basically continue if we suffer isolated and short-term power outages. If oil imports are drastically reduced, we could find a way to cope for awhile. But if banking goes down and telecommunications go down at the same time, it starts to become impossible to fix anything because you don't have the resources available to focus on a single problem. At that point it doesn't matter that there are places where no problems exist. Those places are still dependent on a supply line which is broken in too many places. That's the collapse of the web and that's why it's scary to contemplate.

-- Doug (douglasjohnson@prodigy.net), May 28, 1999.

Flint said- As a result, the more pessimistic tend to argue their position by means of the "want of a nail" sequences. The fundamental problem with this analysis is that if it were even slightly true, a modern economy wouldn't be workable at all. Because there are constant failures and breakdowns, many of them in key places. The "all is connected" theory would hold that these breakdowns would cripple the economy. We can even show how this happens in detail. Except in real life, it doesn't happen.-

In the microcosm, 'want of a nail' DOES apply and brings systems down frequently. I would argue that the 'want of a nail' scenario has not brought down this complex civilization precisely because of its complex, adaptive nature. This does not preclude such a possibility, however. By definition, a complex system must be able to adapt to numerous assaults in order to survive. Our civilization certainly meets this criterium.

Numerous does not mean infinite of course. And aye there's the rub.

I think the best analogy both to the system and to individual understanding of it is the human body. The most complex system of them all multiple redundancies, parallel systems and backups. A mammalian body can withstand incredible chaos, indeed life by definition is the ability to withstand Newton's Second Law effectively.

Here is where I believe the analogy to understanding y2k applies. The constant assaults on our society are below the awareness threshold. Most of the millions of assaults on our physical organization and its ability to function are COMPLETELY UNKOWN TO US. We are aware of only the small percentage that is sufficiently powerful to make us ill and this is a very small percentage indeed.

It happens below our consciousness thousands and thousands of times each and every day. Once in a while a threat is serious enough to make us ill. Most of these are handled and we get well again, the miracle of complexity at work. The common mistake is in believing that the illness episodes constitute the bulk of the assaults, this is not true.

In actual fact, assaults on our bodies fall into three basic categories, 1) below the threshold of damage and hence awareness 2) above that threshold but below system collapse (ie illness) 3) sufficient to collapse the system ( death )

The assaults that fall into category two are a very, very small percentage. Percentage wise most attacks on the complex system that is life either don't affect it at all or destroy it. The middle ground seems large to us only because it occupies our attention. It is in fact quite small, as I fear the middle ground in y2k may be. That doesn't mean y2k won't make us sick, we puke our guts out and get well, merely that that possibility occupies a narrow range in the spectrum.

The question is how complex is our society really? The more complex, the more powerful but also ironically the more fragile. The steeper the slope from functioning to failure. Simple organisms are often much harder to kill that one with a complex system of systems. Cut a planaria in half and it keeps on trucking and regrows new ends! Marie Antoinette would have liked that ability. I'm sure.

We need to hope that the complexity we sense isn't really there.

And there are choke points of course, oxygen being the most critical. Stop it, and the magnificently adaptive machine ceases in short order.

The argument that failures occur in computer systems everyday and we survive says nothing meaningful regarding this threat. The assumption that we will muddle through, while certainly possible and certainly to be hoped and prayed for, does not account for as large a number of the possible outcomes as is commonly believed.

Regards,

Will

-- Will Huett (willhuett@usa.net), May 28, 1999.

When I spent my time in the computer imaging field--working with landscapers, architects, interior designers, construction contractors, 2D and 3D computer designers, the dealership signage of group from TOYOTA Motors, and the substation landscaping group for SCE Southern California Edison, etc.--I was constantly amazed at the inability of people to visualize changes. For me its easy, and has been since childhood.

Its been estimated that 80% of the population cannot visualize.

Thats why pictures are so powerful in helping people get an emotion and meaning behind any event. Its why television is still the main news tool of choice. (And why TV advertising is so pervasive). If you take it a step further, people learn using different sensory abilities. Some hear things better, some need to read something to understand it, some need to feel the emotional impact at a gut level, some use their nose to scent the truth, and some need to touch things or write them out in order to get the reality and the kinesthetic experience. Sight is usually our primary sense, followed by smell.

When I recall that 80% statistic, then the general inability to see the Y2K interconnectedness and global linkages to the local scene, doesnt surprise as much. I could *wish* it were different, but its not.

For the descriptive writers and visual photographers of the world, now is the time to paint the word pictures, or display the it-could-be- like-this images, so the visionary impaired can see the bigger pictures. Not only do you need to paint with the broad brush, but you need to place the magnifying glass on the minutia, and like parables, bring it back to home base and highlight the personal impact.

BACK TO THE SPIDER

The global image I keep seeing post-Y2K is a perfect spiderweb, after a rainstorm hit it. (Many of us see the same picture). Some strands still hold, in precarious places. There are rents and tears in the gossamer fabric. Holes need mending, gaps reconnecting. Lots of fixing required at the effected local levels. No one knew where the storm would break the web, or where it would hold. We could guess or assume, but it is only after the storm that well know for certain. It helps to hold the after-image of sparkling dewdrops, kissed by the sun. Whatever breaks, we can fix eventually.

Our advance lesson to learn now, is to be like the climate-sensitive spider. Be prepared to shift, to move. An old Indian grandfather once told me that spiders know what weather is to come. If its going to be cold and rainy, they build their webs up higher, off the soggy ground, so their home isnt so easily ruined by the low-lying damp. If a hot time is coming, they build closer to the ground, for the moisture.

Its time for us all to re-build on higher (or lower) ground. Depending on our varied and completely different locations. If not now, then afterwards, we might learn.

Diane

(Heres to all those passing along the pocket-sized Hubble telescopes, with wide-angle lens attachments! Jon--love your examples).

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), May 28, 1999.

Anita:

No, I was born and raised in Michigan. I spent 6+ years unhappy in Texas, mostly outside of Houston, so I know what you mean.

Modern hybrid seeds are true wonders. No arguement there. Much of my most recent information about the tradeoffs of hybrid "miracle strains" of rice and wheat vs traditional strains has come from Science News (a nice weekly summary of science related info, if you're not familiar with it).

A web search on hybrid grains, hybrid rice, hybrid wheat, etc, will bring up a few hundred fairly relevent hits.

My point is not that Hybrid Seeds are bad. It is, instead, that these new rice and wheat strains are the agricultural version of "high tech". They need more maintenance, more fertilizer, more pesticides to realize their full potential than traditional strains of grain. All these are subject to shipping problems, production problems, foreign exchange problems and so on. So countries which have just kept up with growing populations by using these varieties may find themselves producing far less food than they would otherwise.

-- Jon Williamson (pssomerville@sprintmail.com), May 28, 1999.

Jon,

Also, from what I read about the hybrid seeds, while they may, often do, produce a better and more resistant crop, the seeds they make will not yield another crop that is true to the parent. Sometimes, there's no telling what kind of "bean" you will get from their seeds.

Diane,

That was a very nice post just above. I really enjoyed it. The comment about the Indian observation was terrific. They were so much "in touch" with their environment, and knowledge of life. Thanks.

-- Gordon (gpconnollly@aol.com), May 28, 1999.

Thanks Gordon.

I have the highest respect for common sense and ancient (and not so ancient) "wisdom."

So much to learn.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), May 29, 1999.

Diane, have you heard of knowledge based learning?

So, all I can conclude from the GIs is that you can "see the rabit". All these analogies are great but one must make a leap of faith between the year miscalculation to the failure of enough systems to bring about 10 years depression. I too can see the rabit but it has no logical basis, it's just opinion. To use the body analogy, we have enough antibodies to survive.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), June 02, 1999.

Maria - Why are you focusing on "ten years depression" - which has probably no more thatn .05% chance of occuring?

Why not address the 99% chance of significant "local" impacts in widespread areas affecting widespread industries and services? After all, does it matter to Cedar Rapids if Chicago has no water, but Cedar Rapids or Marietta does ? Eventually - of course. As a matter of the four days or four weeks of "coping"? No.

A "local" failure - lasting 4 hours, 4 days, or 4 weeks - will be devestating to the "locals" experiencing it.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 02, 1999.