| Who we are | Organizations | Get Involved! | Helpdesk |
| Weblog | About FLORA | Server project | F.A.Q. |
|
|
|||||||
| ||||||||
Election 2006 (and beyond): Digital Copyright Canada
From: russell_-at-_flora.ottawa.on.ca
Date: 24 Oct 1998 17:31:57 -0400
References: <3.0.1.32.19981023002059.0078a44c@mars.ark.com>
Note: I'm replying to a forward of this article posted to some Green
Party forums. The URL of that article is provided at the beginning for
those who did not see the original. Sorry for any duplicates as I am
Bcc'ing those same forums as well as the TAO y2k discussion, the
Comnet-www group, and
On Fri, 23 Oct 1998, ernie yacub wrote:
> Y2K and the Bell Curve
> By Michael S. Hyatt & Bill Dunn * October 21, 1998
> http://y2ktimebomb.com/Economy/Predictions/hyatt9842.htm
*sigh*
Comparisons to University exams fail on a number of accounts. I believe
we need to think more closely about these issues or we are always going to
be doomed to repeat them.
a) Unlike an Exam which must be written by all students, some students
kept their work up-to-date throughout the year, had meetings with the
professor, and were exempted from this final 'crunch' exam.
People need to realize that not all software was improperly tested or
maintained in the first place, and thus would not be prone to Y2K and the
millions of other software-testing issues that one can run into. Y2K was
not a surprise to anyone, and it was poor business decisions (forcing
untested software into production, and leaving improperly maintained
software in production) that are at the root of this problem.
b) Unlike an Exam where an overall poor mark by the class might end up
boosting all marks of all students, including the high-achievers, an
overall poor mark in this "reality classroom" will bring everyone down.
It doesn't matter that I am personally part of a software industry (Free
Software - think Free Speech, not Free Beer) that allows for appropriate
peer review of all work (I am quite confident with my own tools), I am
still dependent on the banking system, governments, food-distribution,
electrical system, and other such organizations that have largely been
incompetent in their overall Information Technology strategies.
I wrote a paper a little while ago entitled "Year 2000 and secrets: New
problem, or a symptom of an old problem?"
<http://www.flora.org/russell/work/y2k.html> where my main thrust is:
Computer Software is like any other information used by humans or
machines and needs to be:
- periodically updated as conditions change
- thoroughly tested (peer-reviewed, verified, tested in many
environments, etc)
- not be relied upon unless the last two conditions are met.
I point at a total lack of transparency of the computer industry (Which
causes a lack of testing, and removes the ability of consumers to
adequately determine whether the information is worthy of being relied
upon), and poor business management as two of the primary *causes* of the
problem.
I say *causes* as I do not subscribe to the belief that this problem was
unavoidable, and that large complex systems always lead to such problems.
In most progressive movements it is very often argued that distributed,
local, democratic and transparent governance is a solution to many of our
problems in managing complex structures in society, and I see no reason
not to apply these same beliefs to other complex systems such as
Information Technology.
Why look for causes and not just solve the problem? I believe that just
trying to solve the problem without thinking about the roots of the
problem is like putting a small bandaid on a bullet wound, and not looking
around for all the other snipers. Are we solving a problem by using the
same mismanagement techniques as part of our temporary solutions, or do we
want to spend our energies on more longer term solutions? Are we solving
the problem by thinking that once we live through January 1, 2000 that all
the problems of mismanaged information technologies will go away?
The Y2K bug is just one of millions of such software(information)
verification issues, all of which can negatively effect us at a variety of
times and conditions. Please don't get bogged down with this one issue and
loose sight of the forest for a single (although arguably large) tree.
---
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.org/russell/work/>
FLORA COMMUNITY WEB: NEW INTERNET CONNECTION AND NEW LOOK
http://www.flora.org/russell/press-19981001.html
http://www.flora.org/russell/work/closed-ms1.html Is MS a Monopoly?
| Please read the FLORA.org Terms and Conditions before you submit information to FLORA.org | |
Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign(USA) (Canada) |
 FLORA Community Web
(FLORA.ORG) is sponsored by FLORA
Community Consulting (FLORA.CA).
|