Y2K and gain-maximizing

[Glenn Bacon <gcbacon@roadrunner.com>]

I believe the major hypothesis behind this forum  may be
"deeply-flawed."   The Y2K issue has little to do with gain-max., at
either the level of individuals or of corporations.  Its causes are a
combination of sloppy behavior, ignorance of future consequences and
denial.   The world-wide AIDS problem provides a better metaphor.

The sloppy (programming) behavior I outlined in an earlier note which
has been entered into the forum by Verzola.  I would argue, that
beyond the age of punched cards, the cost of memory or storage was an
insignificant issue in the propagation of 2-digit year fields.
Programmers were ignorant of the possibility that their work would
have consequences 40 years hence.  Use the data as it appeared in the
cards.   Further, computer systems were viewed as capital equipment
that had a life comparable to other production tools.  The prevailing
view was that they would be completely replaced many times over before
the end of the century.  There was simply no issue that invoked a
choice of gain-max. or not.

To argue that Y2K is the result of corporate gain-max. requires that
one show that 2-digit year fields were a conscious policy decision by
corporate leaders.  I doubt that anyone can find such evidence.  Most
corporate leaders (even in computer companies) view programming as an
archane art practiced by unrully and uncommunicative people who
usually don't meet critical schedules.  The less they have to do with
it the better.  Until it was seen as a real problem in the 80s
(because systems seem to live forever), the Y2K problem was opaque to
corporate policy. Corporate gain-max. was simply not the root of the
issue.

To the programmers credit, many major system components built in the
80s and beyond (languages, database managers, operating systems etc.)
could handle 4-digit year fields if the users and the hardware choose
to use them in that mode.

Gain-max. may have something to do with the rate of remediation once
the problem was visible and credible.  But I would argue that denial
was the dominant issue.  There is a story that when Clinton was told
about the Y2K issue he didn't believe it was significant because no
country with great companies like Microsoft and Intel could possibly
have such a problem.  (Like no country with Merck and Pfiszer should
have an AIDS problem.)  The Y2K management litterature is full of
advice on how the CIO can convince the CEO there is a real problem and
get the extra funds needed to fix it.  Big time Denial!

Gain-max. is such an intrinsic characteristic of living things (among
many other behaviors) that it is impossible to separate it from Y2K.
But for those who are ideologically committed to flogging
multinationals as gain-maximizers, there are probably better horses to
ride than Y2K.

Glenn Bacon