Re: Petroleum and Y2K

Ka-Ping Yee (
Fri, 8 Oct 1999 04:36:20 -0700 (PDT)

On Thu, 7 Oct 1999, Robert Harley wrote:
> >Wave your eyeballs over this (sent me by my sister):
> I waved them over it and it is a load of idiotic bullshit of the
> same pathetic standard as most of the other Y2K scare stories.

So you say this. I have seen other people have this reaction too.

But why?

I haven't made up my mind exactly how concerned to be yet. However,
one thing that bugs me a lot is that whenever we put all the facts
together, the outlook seems pretty troubling. I have read several
explanations of how bad things will happen, and they are usually
filled with facts. But all the reassuring statements seem to consist
only of "Well, it just *can't* be that bad". I haven't come across
one yet that is really supported by facts.

Do you know something about oil pumping that i don't? Are they in
fact not controlled by embedded systems as the article describes?

> Rather, keep in mind the confidently predicted disasters on 1/1/99, in
> GPS week 1024, on 1/9/99, on 9/9/99... nothing happened.

You know this is not a satisfactory response. We only expected
certain limited pieces of software to fail, or old GPS receivers
to fail. We didn't expect the embedded controllers to fail, which
is the major fear for 1/1/00.

Please -- reassure me. Show me some facts, or point me at something
with facts that will actually back up the position that our energy
sources will continue to function properly in 2000.

I would honestly love to feel better about this. Problem is,
right now i don't have anything to go on.

I know i may be opening myself up to some humiliation here by
exposing gullibility, but i'd much rather have all the facts in
hand than sit around hoping, like everyone else, that it'll all
"just be okay". I think it's important to get this information
all out in the open.

Thank you all for earnestly thinking about this.

-- ?!ng

"There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes."
-- Dr. Who