Subject: REVIEW: "Deadline Y2K", Mark Joseph

From: "Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor" <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Jun 1999 17:51:43 -0400

Deadline Y2K by Mark Joseph
	Review Copyright 1999 Robert M. Slade

First of all, I have to say that after the halfway (or maybe two thirds)
point, I really got into this book.  The action is tense, interesting, and
well thought out.  The geeks save the day, even outclevering the semi-evil
capitalist.

That said, I'll go back to the opening I originally intended to use for
this review:

The Bad News is that Joseph figures we're all gonna die, or a reasonable
facsimile thereof.

The Good News is that Joseph gets so much else wrong that, based on the
fact that he predicts disaster, we'll probably have a fairly easy time of
it.  The author has a deep, profound, and abiding lack of understanding of
Y2K.

The one concept he does seem to understand is that the most serious Y2K
problems arise from the interconnected nature of modern systems, and the
fact that small problems, added, multiply themselves.  This is good, and
is used to good effect at times in the story.

The list of negative accomplishments is rather longer.  Lets start with
stereotypes.  We have magic bullet Y2K fixing software.  We have the
traditional, mythical salami scam.  We have the hygienically challenged
genius hacker who starts out as a completely irresponsible flake, and
suddenly transforms into a dedicated, managerial, recruiting, social
worker.  We have the multi-millionaire tycoon having his bagel every
morning and shooting the breeze with the boys from the old 'hood.  This is
the same guy who alienates his wife and kid by never having time for them.

Then there are specific technical errors.  The credit card companies hit
the Y2K wall in 1997 because of expiration dates, and therefore have
generally dealt with the issue.  There will not be a sudden collapse of
the credit card system in the hours just before midnight, December 31,
1999.  In fact, a large number of failures in the book happen in the last
few hours of 1999, rather than months or years before, or slightly after.
The failures of old GPS (Global Positioning System) terminals that will
happen in August of 1999 have a very vague and conceptual relation to Y2K
in that the problem results from a "number of weeks" field that is limited
to ten bits.  It has nothing to do with a sudden change of format.

I have no idea why you need to calculate dates in order to tell the
difference between O positive and O negative blood.

Then there are the more general mistakes.  One platform definitely does
not fit all: it is highly unlikely that a single IBM mainframe could
accommodate all the control programs from a power utility, civic
infrastructures, telecommunications companies, and transit authorities.
Nobody snuck a VAX or a UNIX box into the mix anywhere?  Besides, I
understand that the New York subway still has drivers.  But you could
check with Bombardier...

It is also unlikely that a single mainframe could handle the processing
load required to run all of them concurrently.  We will ignore, for the
moment, the likelihood of a small band of geeks being able to fulfill all
the checking that large corporations were unable to do *and* get it to run
right the first time they do a smoke test.

There is no reason that someone supplying utility software would have any
need to access full bank data records.  Yes, there is a T-4, and, yes, it
is bigger than a T-1 or T-3.  But almost nobody uses that designation: it
just isn't that useful in discussing the bandwidth bundles that are
provided.

Furthermore, I don't care what von Neumann said; a data file, even a very
large data file, is *not* the same as code.  Yes, if someone was careless,
a very large data file could possibly overrun its bounds and crash a
system, but there would be no difference between a store completely
restocking and a store starting up for the first time, now would there be?

Joseph's dialogue is readable, although not particularly great.  His
characterizations could use some work.  At one point (page 166) someone
goes from being "amused and thrilled" to being ready to "die of anxiety"
in the space of one sentence, with nothing happening in the interim.

Entertaining, yes, but only after you get through the annoying bits at the
beginning.

%A   Mark Joseph
%C   175 Fifth Ave., New York, NY   10010
%D   1999
%G   0-312-20202-4
%I   St. Martin's Press
%O   U$24.95/C$34.99 212-674-5151 fax 800-288-2131 www.stmartins.com
%P   294 p.
%T   "Deadline Y2K"

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
[email-masked]  [email-masked]  [email-masked] [email-masked]
     It is bad to suppress laughter;
     it goes back down and spreads to your hips.
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade