X-Message-Number: 10112
From: 
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 19:10:03 EDT
Subject: y2k

Peter Merel (Cryonet #10100) offered some reasons for thinking the y2k problem
may be very serious, even catastrophic economically/politically. In particular
he mentioned "early to mid 1999 a run on banks;" beginning 9/9/99 and on Aug.
22 (1999?)many problems including navigation systems and bank interest
calculations; 1/1/00 global disruptions in electrical generation and
distribution, telecommunications, trains, planes, and military systems; maybe
water and sewage. Possible result "panic, rioting, and firestorms in many
major cities around the world." He suggests that individuals and cryonics
organizations should worry about it.

Some preliminary comments:

First, most major industries/businesses are unlikely to allow themselves to be
vulnerable to disaster. Damage, maybe, but not disaster. Ways will be found.
Human stupidity is formidable, but there are limits.

Second, there are many obvious partial and makeshift interim solutions. For
example, if a power company relies on computers to control its output(s), it
could--instead of making minute-by-minute computer-controlled decisions based
on actual supply and demand--make hourly decisions based on averages.
Brownouts maybe and money lost, but no disaster.

As another example, if a government agency (Social Security?) is vulnerable,
in the questionable period it could simply send out the same checks as last
month. Lots of errors in absolute terms, but no catastrophe. Similarly, if a
business has a problem with paying bills, just send out average payments to
the usual people for a while. And so on and on. Calm and common sense.

The most important step for vulnerable banks and government would be simply to
assure depositors (and bondholders etc.) that nothing is lost, any more than
it would be (say) by a snowstorm that prevented employes from getting to work.
Just a delay and inconvenience. Keep calm. 

A run on banks beginning "early to mid 1999"? Early 1999 is only around 6
months away. One obvious recourse for the depositor is to ascertain, very
soon, whether his own bank is internally vulnerable to the y2k problem. If it
is, change banks. Of course, even an internally safe bank might be vulnerable
to a breakdown in inter-bank clearing operations, if those facilities are
vulnerable. But again this would "just" be a matter of delay. (In one of Tom
Clancy's novels, Japan tried to wage economic war on the U.S. by fouling up
investment/finance/market related computers, causing a panic. The solution was
to disregard all trades made during the panic and revert to the status quo
ante.) I doubt that the stock and commodity exchanges are vulnerable; I think
most of them have been recently upgraded.

What depositors/customers/consumers generally can do is demand credible
reassurance, from all those they deal with, as to Y2k vulnerability, on threat
of switching immediately to someone else. Maybe ask your local newspaper to
establish a "y2k desk" to report regularly and frequently on local businesses
and governments.

For a cryonics organization, the worst possibility might be an interruption of
liquid nitrogen supply. Would steel making be badly curtailed, and would there
then be a shortage of nitrogen? We'll look into it. If it looks like a real
possibility, we could pay the local suppliers to keep a substantial reserve
for us. (Who knows--in a world depression scenario maybe nitrogen would be
cheaper.)  

Robert Ettinger
Cryonics Institute
Immortalist Society
http://www.cryonics.org

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10112