From: “Martinus Luther” <martinusl@hotmail.com>
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: 8fe7f9c9501389e16eaae2b82e350274b96e4c30667e6f9d7cb03cd0edaedc9d
Message ID: <19981130131031.26101.qmail@hotmail.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1998-11-30 14:06:00 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 22:06:00 +0800
From: "Martinus Luther" <martinusl@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 22:06:00 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: y2k/gary north delusions
Message-ID: <19981130131031.26101.qmail@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
VNZ quoted Gary North:
> Astronomy is a precise science. It can predict
> events such as this one with remarkable accuracy.
> The astronomers do not know how intense this
> shower will be, but they know for certain that tonight
> will be the highest density night.
Actually they were 10 or 12 hours out - which
in Europe at any rate had the effect that the
highest density night was't the one predicted :-)
But I agree with you. This whole apocalyptic take on the thing is
(almost certainly) wrong. (Of course that doesn't mean you shouldn't
prepare for it... if you honestly thought that spending a few hundred
dollars could save you from a 1% chance of death, you'd probably do it.
If the 99% turns out to be true what have you got - a year's supply of
baked beans & sardines in tomato sauce)
Computers will crash - or rather more seriously applications will
produce bad results, this is much more an application problem than an OS
problem - in fact things are already going wrong. But it won't happen
all in one big bang on the 1st of January. Things will get slowly worse
for the next year, the rate of problems will go up, more people will be
knocking up quick-and-dirty work-arounds and fewer people working on new
projects. North looks at it as a programming problem - but it's not,
not when it actually hits, it then becomes ann operations problem. And
operators, system programmers & system administrators are used to
working with computer systems that don't work. They do it every day. And
the peopel who rely on computer systems are used to working when they go
down. And if they aren't there are all those middle-aged middle-managers
they laid off in the downsizing who can come back and show them how it
used to be done.
There will be hassle and hard work and very possibly a depression. But
there is very, very unlikely to be the kind of catastrophic failure that
North seems to long for.
And even if it does fall out that way, he's wrong about cities as well.
We *know* cities survive a hell of a beating, we saw it again and again
in WW2. (Take a look at a picture of Hamburg in August 1943. They
rebuilt that. Themselves, starting the day after) The complete
physical destruction of the infrastructure of a city does not kill a
city. A city is made of *people*, not buildings. People with the skills
that make cities work, and people who - just because they are in a city
- need to get along to make cities work.
If all our big systems go down we will rebuild them. And what's more
we'll rebuild them quickest in the big cities, because it's the big
cities that have the concentration of people with the skills, and
perhaps more importantly, the motivation to rebuild them.
(Anyway, despite North, in the event of a complete collapse of business
and government probably the worst place to be is the outer suburbs. You
need fuel to get around (in the inner cities everything is close by). If
there are refugees from cities they have to pass through the suburbs -
and there is a lot more to steal there than there is on the open
countryside & a lot fewer people to stop you than in the city centres.)
*Real* rural life will continue of course, because people have the land
and the skills to use it. And becauwse they tend to have stores. I don't
know if it would be a very prosperous rural life for most people in the
"developed" parts of the world though. I wonder what the sudden
withdrawl of pesticides, herbicides, fertiliser, & fuel to fly the
crop-sprayer would do to yields on the average American industrial farm?
If the year 2000 is half as bad as North says it will be there will be a
massive change in the balance of economic power away from North America
and towards the so-called Third World.
It looks like Gary North isn't really interested in the year 2000
problem. What he is interested in seems to be guns. He's latched on to
this issue because it allows him to think and write more about guns.
And, like so many other gunwankers he seems to get off fantasising about
the total collapse of civil society because that way he gets to feel
good about his guns. All this obession with death and destruction is a
bit strange in someone rumoured to be a Christian.
Of course where I am in London it's all academic. The nearest genuine
open country is maybe 150 miles away, in a different nation, on the
other side of the Channel. Most of what passes for countyside in the
south of England is really exurbia, a sort of huge extended suburbia got
up to look rural. Less than one percent of the population actually works
on the land. We have more computer programmers than farmers. Most people
in London have never even met a farmer. If it all falls over we will
just have to put it back up again because there is no-where else to go.
Hey, maybe North is right about the USA. Maybe all the programmers will
leave town to starve in the country. Maybe the systems will never get
fixed. Maybe heavily armed gangs will take over the cities. Maybe you
never will rebuild your civilization. I hope not. But if it does turn
out that way we'll send you some foreign aid.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Return to December 1998
Return to “Petro <petro@playboy.com>”