The Y2K Crisis -- a Failed Prediction

How would you like to be one of the people quoted on the top failed prediction lists, like the "Top 87 Bad Predictions about the Future" or the "Top 30 Failed Technology Predictions"? Do you think Ken Olson is being consulted about the future of computing? (Ken's famous prediction: "there is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home").

This brings up an interesting question: will a failed prediction impact your career, or the reputation of your company? But I digress... back to the assignment:

I think Y2K is a good example of a failed prediction for analysis because: 1) it was recent; 2) it was related to the pervasive use of computer technology; and 3) there was world-wide awareness of this doomsday prediction. I remember people pulling money from banks based on the fear that the Y2K crisis would cripple our economy. The company I was working for at the time set up a 24-hour support service in anticipation of system crashes and frantic customer calls. We didn't have a single problem.

The world survived. There was no crisis.

In my next posts, I'll provide more insights into this failed prediction.

Web 2.0 Tools

I prefer to keep my Internet-based information sharing to a minimum (e.g. when required for class), so I don't use many of the popular Web 2.0 tools -- at least not the way other folks use them. I subscribe to RSS feeds from some of the best thinkers in my profession, but you won't find me on MySpace, youTube, or any of the other 'socialization' sites. I'd rather go hiking....

That doesn't mean I don't use web-based collaboration tools. My work requires network-based interaction, but that's always conducted in secure, closed sessions (at least we hope it is). I use NetMeeting, WebEx, and other collaboration tools. I wouldn't associate these with the "Web 2.0" buzzword, but there are some commonality in terms of purpose and technology.

I'm more interested in the underlying mechanisms that support the Web 2.0 approach to information sharing. I've worked on projects that use REST, XML, Atom/RSS, and a variety of large-scale data dissemination / management strategies --- the same underlying technologies that support all this Internet-based collaboration. Theses technical aspects are far more interesting to me than reading some anonymous person's opinions on gun ownership, or the plight of the caribou.

ted.com: "Brain Magic"

I've always been intrigued by the human brain -- especially discussions on 'untapped potential'. ted.com had some interesting dicussions on the topic, but I wouldn't consider them futuristic or innovative. At least not like Ian Pearson's predictions about the future of our brain...

Ian Pearson is a "Futurologist". He's got some interesting predictions for human evolution. According to Ian, we'll be evolving from Homo Sapiens into more intelligent life forms:

• Homo Optimus, which are humans with modified brains
• Homo Cyberneticus, which will leverage cybernetic prosthesis with full-duplex mind-machine links
• Homo Hybridus, will bring telepathic communication with other machines and people
• Homo Machinus, where the mind-machine link becomes totally transparent

That's a bold prediction! But as Ian points out, "I usually get it right, but since the future is never totally predictable, I sometimes get it wrong too, about 15% of the time. But I specialise in doing long term stuff, so I have a lot of fun. I hope to be retired before anyone can prove me wrong."

I'll avoid the temptation to rant about "futuring"... (as I said in class, I think the most interesting predictions about the future would come from six graders).

I'll be spending more time discussing brain-computer interfaces in future posts. For now, check out this article: "The Human Brain: Should we Upgrade?"

Intro

This is my last course of my 4th academic degree. If I ever consider another engineering-related degree, please shoot me. My future educational pursuits will be in the area of finance and tax laws, to support my professional athletic career (aka retirement).

My expertise and interests have changed over the past 3 decades. I started doing board-level hardware design of high-performance multi-processor signal processing systems, then moved to device drivers, and finally to software-based infrastructures for distributed systems -- both LAN- and WAN-based systems, small- and large-scale systems, commercial and military. I'm currently more interested in distributed system design strategies that maximize performance while reducing software complexity.

My dreams for what will be needed in 10-15 years don't really match my expertise and interests. For example, I think the most important things we (USA) need are 1) alternative energy strategies, 2) homeland security solutions, 3) more cost-effective, proactive health care management, and 4) more effective military technologies for urban fighting.

The technologies that I'd be interested in exploring are based on my expertise and interests (not the top needs of the USA, which I'll leave as an exercise for the reader):

1. Advanced medical technologies, including the computer technology aspects of brain-human interfaces (for handicapped) or non-invasive monitoring solutions for proactive health care.
2. Cluster computer technologies, which is a fertile area for CS research. This is narrowly scoped to multi-processor, multi-core technologies (it's not focused on the world's critical needs), but that's my interest and my expertise.