1998-12-07 - Re: y2k/gary north delusions

Header Data

From: “Trei, Peter” <ptrei@securitydynamics.com>
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: 75a3d0291073c313571c7066f511a00c58f6b6183467b26a472e3052bfc15ddd
Message ID: <D104150098E6D111B7830000F8D90AE84DDFB6@exna02.securitydynamics.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1998-12-07 16:47:22 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 00:47:22 +0800

Raw message

From: "Trei, Peter" <ptrei@securitydynamics.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 00:47:22 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: y2k/gary north delusions
Message-ID: <D104150098E6D111B7830000F8D90AE84DDFB6@exna02.securitydynamics.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



As a former New Yorker, I find this whole
thread majorly uninformed.

Most of New York's water moves from the 
Catskills to the tap (or toilet) via
gravity, without encountering a pump
at any point during the way. Even if
all power and automated controls
failed, most of the city would continue 
to get water (remember - the system was
designed long before computers, or even
widespread electricity).

The only areas with major problems would
be the high spots - Washington Heights/ 
Spanish Harlem, some parts of the Bronx,
and the upper floors of some highrises. 

Even assuming that somehow every toilet
in the city became unusable, the decidedly
lowtech solid waste disposal system (trucks
to landfills in Staten Island and New Jersey, 
or barges to the Atlantic), would still operate.
The  solid volume of people's excrement is 
miniscule compared to the volume of material 
already handled. (If you think no crap goes 
into the system, you clearly have not spent 
time near in infant in the age of Pampers).

I suspect that Los Angeles, and other cities
which have grown recently in arid areas, would
have a lot more trouble.

Peter Trei





Thread