From: Ed Yourdon 
Subject: Re: [Fwd: SNET: Re: Ed Yourdon: Y2K Pro's are Terrified]
Date: 2 Mar 1998 21:42:19 -0500
To: "Jodi Reed" ,
        "snetnews@world.std.com" 


->  SearchNet's   SNETNEWS   Mailing List

Jodi,

Thanks for your mail...

Re the comments from Nick (whoever he is) and your questions:

First, it's more than just the banks and brokerage companies that are at
risk to Y2K failures: approx 80-90% of business IT companies in EVERY
company are date-related.  Inventory programs, billing applications,
order-entry, accounts receivable, purchasing, etc etc etc.  Then there are
the PC's: not only do you have to worry about the BIOS chips and the OS
problems and the possible non-compliant applications, but also all of the
undocumented user-generated spreadsheets, database programs, and
decision-support systems that have been accumulating for the past 17 years
(since IBM unleashed the PC upon the world) and which are still being
written today.  Consider the kind of spreadsheets being developed today by
accountants, financial planners, marketing specialists, etc etc -- many of
them are still blissfully unaware of the Y2K problem, and their hand-coded
applications will begin misbehaving in any number of mysterious ways in 670
days (or less, depending on the nature of the application).

As for the embedded systems: it's commonly estimated that only 5% of the
embedded systems have any awareness of date and/or time, so there's a
tendency to shrug it off as a small problem.  Unfortunately, there are
approx 25 BILLION embedded systems sprinkled around the world, stuck into
everything from utterly irrelevant devices (toasters and dishwashers) to
reasonably critical systems (electric utility plants, process control
systems in manufacturing organizations, etc.)

If you have a non-safety-critical system, then it's generally okay to just
use common sense to determine the Y2K-compliance situation.  For example,
if you have a coffee-maker that lets you set the hour and minute when the
coffee will start brewing, but does not seem to have any mechanism to
display or set the day, week, or year -- then common sense tells you it's
probably not vulnerable.  And if you're wrong, who cares?

But if it's a safety-critical system, that's a dangerous strategy.  The
manufacturer may have used a generic chip that DOES keep track of the year,
and the programmer may have taken advantage of it internally, even if he
doesn't display it or use it for the "advertised" functionality of the
system.  If it's a coffee-maker, you can shrug your shoulders; if it's a
nuclear reactor, you'd better not.

One of the most common uses of the date-time logic for many embedded
systems is keeping track of how long it's been since the device was
calibrated or serviced; thus, if the device IS subject to a Y2K failure, it
may decide that it's been 99 years since it was last serviced, and shut
down.

Re Nick's comment about pacemakers: as I understand it, the problem is not
that the pacemaker will shut down or misbehave, but rather that it records
time/date-sensitive data about the patient's heart behavior.  That data is
then downloaded to a PC application for review by a doctor, who then
determines whether the patient's medication has to be adjusted (or, I
suppose, whether the pacemaker needs to be replaced).  Thus, in theory, a
non-compliant pacemaker and/or a non-compliant PC analysis program could
lead to a dangerous or even fatal dianosis on the doctor's part.  For the
jaded programmer who says, "Naaah, I can't believe that would really
happen," remember: (a) if you're wrong, the legal consequences are pretty
serious, (b) programmers are ALWAYS optimisitic that nothing will go wrong
with their programs, and (c) whether you like it or not, the FDA is
requiring a demonstration of Y2K compliance in all medical devices before
they will be licenses.

There's lots more, of course, but I think you get the idea ... and I have
to get back to work...

670 days to go.

Ed
---------------------Reply Separator----------------------------
At 1:34 PM -0800 3/2/98, Jodi Reed wrote:
>Ed,
>
> How are you? Good I hope. I was wondering if you could respond to this
>question and respond to the list I provided. It would be great to have
>your expert opinion. Thank you and take care.
>
>Jodi Reed
>
>Ps. Love your book!
>
---------------------Reply Separator----------------------------
>->  SearchNet's   SNETNEWS   Mailing List
>
>
>
>----------
>From: NMMJR 
>To: snetnews@world.std.com
>Subject: Re: SNET: Re: Ed Yourdon: Y2K Pro's are Terrified
>Date: Monday, March 02, 1998 7:44 AM
>
>
>->  SearchNet's   SNETNEWS   Mailing List
>
>The Y2K problem only affects those operations that are DATE-SENSITIVE.
>This
>includes financial trading software, which is why Greenspan referred to
>hundreds of billions being spent to solve the problem.  Banks, brokerages,
>and
>similar entities stand to lose large sums of money if they suddenly stop
>trading.  However, most of the horror stories spread about Y2K (e.g.,
>pacemakers shutting off) simply won't happen, because the date does not
>matter
>to most equipment or programs.
>
>For freedom,
>
>Nick
>
>****************
>
>Could you give a listing of what types of equipment are NOT date-sensitive
>as versus those that ARE date-sensitive? Or do we really know what date-
>sensitive routines have been included in the electronics of equipment
>that, at first glance, seem not to be concerned with date? I am thinking
>of timing sequences for periodical maintenance, renewal of batteries, etc.
>H. Ayre.
>
>
>-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
>->  Posted by: NMMJR 
>
>
>-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
>->  Posted by: "Henry Ayre" 


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edward Yourdon , 1008-A Paseo Del Pueblo Sur, Suite 261
Taos, NM 87571-6412  <===>  phone/fax: 888-814-7605
email: ed@yourdon.com  Web: http://www.yourdon.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------



-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
->  Posted by: Ed Yourdon