This was found at the FreeRepublic Forum and posted there by Dog Gone. Don't know if this is the same person who posts here but I thought it was an excellent essay.

========================================= Start

Y2K EDITORIAL

Why I Think the Deadline Will Be Badly Missed

Because no one knows for sure what will happen, each of us must make an educated guess about the effects of Y2K, and then make a personal decision about what to do about it. I would like to share with you my educated guess.

August 9, 1999

As we head down the homestretch of the Y2K countdown, with less than five months to go, we are being bombarded with conflicting information. Some folks are saying weve got the problem licked and any disruptions will be minor and short-lived. Others are saying weve passed the point of no return, its way too late, and life as we know it will be forever altered in a very negative way. And for every possible scenario in between these two extremes, you can find an article in the newspapers or on the Internet backing it up.

Even the experts are giving conflicting messages. When the U.S. Senate special Y2K committee issued its block-buster report earlier this year, they specifically wrote: "Those who suggest that [Y2K] will be nothing more than a bump in the road are simply misinformed."

But at the press conference on the day the report was released, Sen. Robert Bennett, the committee chairman, said, "In this country we will have a bump in the road." (Could it be the chairman of the committee is simply misinformed?)

In the Executive Summary section, the report clearly stated, "The fundamental questions of risk and personal preparedness cannot be answered at this time."

However, the committee co-chair, Sen. Christopher Dodd, was advising the public during numerous talk show interviews, "Prepare as you would for a three-day snow storm, certainly no more than that." (How can he be certain about "no more than that" if the fundamental question of personal preparedness cannot be answered at this time?)

Corporations and government agencies are being praised for developing contingency plans and stocking up on necessary supplies. But at the same time individuals and families are being criticized for taking similar measures. When corporations stock up its called "prudent." When families stock up its called "panic."

See what I mean? The news is very conflicting. And unfortunately, the level of Y2K "noise" will only increase with each passing week over the next four-plus months.

We must remember: The only thing certain about Y2K is the uncertainty. The only thing we know for sure is that no one knows for sure what will happen. Were just going to have to wait for January 2000 to arrive and then live through a major portion of the year before we really know the true impact of the Y2K phenomenon.

Because no one knows for sure what will happen, each of us must make an educated guess about the effects of Y2K, and then make a personal decision about what to do about it.

I would like to share with you my educated guess. Ive never claimed to be a prophet and I definitely dont have any inside information about the future. I offer this only as an example of how one person formed his educated guess. Youre more than welcome to ignore my view (although youll have to stand in line behind my kids when it comes to ignoring what I say).

Personally, Im leaning more toward the "severe" side of the spectrum. I think that far too many critical technology systems will not be ready to operate smoothly when the new century arrives. I base this educated guess on a few key factors:

1. Self-reported information. Virtually all information we receive about Y2K repair progress is self-reported. As the Senate report noted, this is "analogous to letting students grade their own tests."

It is probably impractical to insist that all repair progress information be verified by independent third parties. The various organizations are hard pressed enough just trying to fix their systems, let alone having dozens of outside auditors checking on everything. But as long as these progress reports are self-reported, we must take what we hear with a huge grain of salt.

2. The CYA corporate mentality. In large organizations, "Cover your [butt]," and, "Tell them what they want to hear," are tremendously powerful forces. Anyone who has ever been in the military, or worked for a large corporation or government agency, knows that low- and mid-level employees do not generally volunteer bad news to their superiors. And when directly questioned by the bosses, most people "sugar-coat" their answers as much as possible.

3. Tackle the easy ones first. When people are faced with daunting projects, they very often begin working on the easier aspects of the job and leave the tougher tasks for later. The reason is two-fold: First, there is a psychological boost when you are being productive and getting something accomplishedit sure beats fretting about the vast scope of the project and getting nothing done. Secondly, you can report real progress to your bosses. Does anyone really believe Y2K projects are being approached any differently?

4. The nature of software projects. Unlike building a house, where its very difficult for the carpenter to exaggerate his progress (imagine that only a hole has been dug for the foundation and the builder is telling the customer, "Yup, well be nailing the roof on in about an hour"), with software projects it is easy to exaggerate progress. Projects that are 40% done or 90% done often seem about the same. Its up to the programmers to honestly report to their superiors how much work has really been accomplished.

And even then, programmers are notoriously optimistic. They may actually believe the project is 90% done, but unexpected glitches and testing delays may drag the completion date out many more months. The vast majority of software projectsever since the invention of computershave not been completed on time. It is simply the nature of software. Missed deadlines are a way of life.

These are the reason why I believe the progress reports we have been hearing (for example: "98% compliant!" "Were almost done!" "Our project is on schedule!" "We are confident that January 1st will be just another day for the XYZ Company!") are far too optimistic.

After forming my educated guess, I based my family preparation plans on a simple axiom: Its better to have something and not need it than to need something and not have it.

The bottom line is that everyone must decide for him or herself what is most likely to occur and then make their plans accordingly. The more information you have about the Y2K issue, the better educated your guess will be.

Oh, and by the way, it you didnt already know it, time is running short.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Posted on 08/10/1999 14:02:27 PDT by Dog Gone

============================================ End

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 10, 1999

Answers

This came from my web page at www.michaelhyatt.com. It is the lead editorial for the week and was written by Bill Dunn. Glad you enjoyed it.

-- Michael Hyatt (mhyatt@michaelhyatt.com), August 10, 1999.

Thanks Michael, much appreciated, this darn internet is quite the contraption!!

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 10, 1999.

Excellent analysis Ray. The events out of left field that are totally unexpected will cause major havoc. For example, we may conclude that the banks will fix their systems and they will be able to find our money after 1 1 2000. However we fail to recognize the other problem with the banks which is that other private corporations could fail, people could lose jobs, bank loans would be in default and the loan losses would be so severe that funds were not available to pay people for the money in their account that has actually been loaned out. Or a big bank may have lost billions on derivatives that would wipe out all of their equity so they could not pay the account holders. Another LTCM anyone?

-- Moe (Moe@3stoges.gom), August 10, 1999.

As well stated as anyone could. Thanks for the piece.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), August 10, 1999.

Ray, My understanding is that Bennett and Dodd, although well- intentioned men, MUST say these things at this point. Because we cannot all prepare. It's simply impossible. How many hints do we need? Those who will prep, will prep. The rest will be unprepared. For everyone to try to prepare would be chaos, which will come later, anyway.

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWAyne@aol.com), August 10, 1999.

Mara commented:

"Ray, My understanding is that Bennett and Dodd, although well- intentioned men, MUST say these things at this point. Because we cannot all prepare. It's simply impossible. How many hints do we need? Those who will prep, will prep."

Mara, IMHO the Federal government had a responsibility to address this problem years ago. They decided, as they always do, to take the approach that would be the least painful to their constituents and thus ensure their ability to retain office. Let the ggod times roll!!

If government had approached this problem with the American people uppermost in their minds we would now be in a much better position from the standpoint of personal and public preparations and overall remediation.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 11, 1999.