Because we could test systems by changing a date, individuals could see what would happen to their systems were they to do nothing. If politicians could have seen the lockdowns and death counts coming their way on March 1st, 2020, they may have acted differently.
This seems like it must've been the decisive factor. Cheaply and quickly evaluating counterfactuals makes decision-making many times easier.
Based on what you wrote here, Y2K mitigation happened over the course of 3 years (1997-1999). That means corporate budgets had time to adjust, POs could be written, new developers hired or contracted, etc. Also, each system needed a few days (or weeks) of work, which could be done at any point in the 3 year span.
COVID mitigation decisions happened over a span of about 3 weeks in March 2020, and required everyone to continue applying those mitigations indefinitely.
Acid Rain / Ozone depletion were also solved, and also were "companies have to make a one-time investment at some point in a multi-year window" type solutions.
Greenhouse Gas accumulation is a mixed bag, but we are seeing that one-time investments (eg installing solar power plants) are happening, and indefinite changes (extracting CO2 in equal proportion to what is created as an additional cost of burning fuel) are not
"Many thousands of date problems were found in commercial data processing systems and corrected. (The task was huge – to handle the work just for General Motors in Europe, Deloitte had to hire an aircraft hangar and local hotels to house the army of consultants, and buy hundreds of PCs)."
Sounds like more than a few weeks.
This is a linkpost for Martyn Thomas's What Really Happened in Y2K and its associated talk recording.
Some spoke of a terrible catastrophe coming inevitably.
They said the death toll could be in the millions, if not higher.
An alarm was raised, but few paid attention.
But soon it became too big to ignore.
It felt like the entire world was focused on the problem.
And then....nothing happened.
Or so they say.
Y2K often gets portrayed as a false crisis turned into a boondoggle. But, but in truth quite a lot of critical infrastructure failed due to the bug – and we should be glad it got caught in testing.
My career is in programming tools and software maintenance, and one of my mentors built program transformation tools in that era. I've known for a long time that Y2K was a real problem – and one that didn't end in 2000, with many companies implementing hacks to put it off by 20 years.
Today, I watched Martyn Thomas's excellent talk What Really Happened in Y2K . Thomas knows what he's talking about: he was on the ground as the leader of consulting teams addressing Y2K, and is now a professor of software engineering. Never have I seen such a clear and detailed description of the many things that almost went wrong.
As I watched, something struck me:
Like many others here, I watched in March 2020 as COVID presented humanity a practice run in global coordination to avoid scientific catastrophe, and humanity received a solid F. Yet Y2K is an example of humanity succeeding against a similarly inevitable catastrophe, with the IY2KCC (International Y2K Coordination Committee) recommending sound countermeasures in exactly the way the WHO didn't. As I and many readers are concerned that humanity may soon face another international coordination problem in the race for AGI, this story serves as an example of history that we should wish to repeat.
And we should ask: What made Y2K different from COVID? Could it be just that it wasn't politicized? I was not reading
blog postsop-eds in 1999 and don't know how strong the Y2K naysayers were, so I'm not even sure that's true.Below are highlighted quotes from the article. Let's hope that preventing unaligned AGI is more like Y2K and less like COVID.
There were early warnings
As Y2K drew nearer, the problems mounted
Testing showed the impending danger
Pressure mounted from above
There were still real problems, but they didn't cascade
Why do some people think it all didn't matter?
There are two narratives to why the world did not end on Y2K: One is that we were saved by all the investment preventing it; the other is that it was nothing to begin with. The evidence presented in favor of the latter argument is that countries and companies that did not invest in it also experienced few problems. Thomas is firmly in the first camp. His counterargument? Latecomers rode on the backs of those who spent a fortune.
Some ideas for why we succeeded against Y2K, but not COVID