Computer Problem? Why Not Blame Y2K?
The news of a computer malfunction in New Jersey a few weeks ago that resulted in the distribution of $23 million in food stamp benefits spread like wildfire when state officials raised the possibility that it was caused by the year 2000 problem.
It appeared to be one of the most serious examples of a large-scale failure related to the computer glitch. For many of those who have predicted disaster come Jan. 1, it was taken as hard evidence that the problem was far from repaired despite assurances from companies and government agencies.
The only problem was, the error wasn’t related to the year 2000 at all. After a day of investigation, the New Jersey Department of Human Services recanted its earlier statements and announced that the problem was caused by a simple typographical error.
“Two and a half weeks before this, we had taken the system down to do a whole bunch of changes, including program enhancements and a year 2000 overhaul,” said Jacqueline Tencza, a department spokeswoman. “We just assumed it was all linked. I think everyone just jumped on that assumption.”
As Jan. 1, 2000, draws nearer, the computer glitch is becoming a kind of omnibus gremlin of modern life. It has been blamed for everything from computer crashes to power outages. Unfounded reports of widespread problems forecast for the date emerge on a weekly basis, ranging from the shutdown of oil refineries to the malfunction of Cadillacs due to a failure in their on-board computer systems.
“Y2K is the computer boogeyman,” said Alan Dundes, professor of anthropology and folklore at UC Berkeley. “It articulates all our fears. We like to have an enemy we can identify and overcome.”
The anxiety level is high enough that even mundane problems can appear to be widespread and severe as long as they have a whiff of the millennium bug on them.
Recent reports of a Y2K bank scam surged through law enforcement agencies and banking organizations even though there were few, if any, actual cases. The Canadian Bankers Assn. put out a nationwide alert.
“We wouldn’t have put out the alert, but the trouble is that there are people saying the sky is falling,” said Gene McLean, director of security for the banking group. “The year 2000 is really the kicker in this thing.”
Y2K doesn’t need rumor and hype to establish its credentials as a serious problem. It is already considered one of the greatest technological blunders in history.
The federal government alone is spending more than $6.8 billion to correct the problem, while General Motors has spent at least $710 million.
With so much money having been funneled to it, there’s no dispute that Y2K is real and could cause serious trouble if not fixed. But fears about the ubiquity and complexity of the millennium bug have made it an easy target for blame when no other explanations are handy.
The glitch stems from the long-standing tradition in computer programming of using two digits instead of four to represent years.
The system works fine when all dates are in the same century, but when 2000 arrives, some computers could become confused, leading to malfunctions or calculation errors. For example, the year “00” could be interpreted as either “1900” or “2000.”
The problem has been difficult to solve because the use of two digits is so widespread. Computers, software of all sorts and even embedded microprocessors that control power plant and factory machinery are all vulnerable to the glitch.
Because it is so widely known, the millennium bug’s mere mention can elevate an otherwise minor problem to celebrity status.
Y2K rumor control has been difficult, in part, because of the easy dissemination of information on the Internet and the general suspicion about assurances from companies and government agencies.
Even the most implausible and unfounded rumors endure longer and seem more fearsome while Y2K hovers above them. In recent months, rumors have surfaced about year 2000-related food stockpiling by the White House, “concentration camps” in the Southern California desert and government tracking of large freeze-dried food purchases.
Earlier this year, police agencies and banking organizations put out an urgent warning about scam artists preying on year 2000 fears.
The warnings were apparently prompted by an e-mail message, sent out by the thousands, that read: “I got a call from a man this weekend telling me he represented my bank and that they were having difficulty meeting requirements to be computer ready for Y2K. He said all bank customers would need to transfer their accounts to a bond account specially designed to protect our money until the bank could fully comply with Y2K requirements.”
The caller then purportedly asked for account numbers and verbal authorization to transfer the funds. The message appeared real on the surface. It even provided the area code where the call originated--248 around Pontiac, Mich.
The Wisconsin Credit Union League, which represents 360 credit unions around the state, warned that “scam artists are ripping people off by preying on consumers’ concerns about the millennium change. Don’t get taken!”
The warnings have circulated for nearly two months, generating dozens of news reports around the world.
But there have been few, if any, cases reported. The FBI, the Secret Service, the Federal Trade Commission, the American Bankers Assn. and even the Wisconsin group knew of no one who had actually been called.
The Canadian Bankers Assn. said it was aware of one case but provided no details.
“If it had reached a certain level of cases, the field offices would have notified us,” said FBI spokeswoman Jule Miller. “That’s not to say the local field offices haven’t seen a case, but there is no epidemic.”
Det. Sgt. Barry Elliott of PhoneBusters, Canada’s national clearinghouse for telemarketing fraud, said that even without a case, it was worth issuing a warning on Y2K bank scams since it was plausible and people are so worried that they could easily fall for one.
Sharon Wilks, a spokeswoman for the Canadian Bankers Assn., said the group’s alert also helped allay fears about the banking industry in general.
“Quite honestly, one of our greatest concerns was having someone running around saying that the banking industry wasn’t ready,” she said.
