Noam Chomsky on Y2K and MAI - The New World Order Part 8 (1998)

November 30, 1998 http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww....

Watch the full lecture: http://thefilmarchived.blogspot.com/2010/08/noam-chomsky-on-new-world-order-1...

The Year 2000 problem (also known as the Y2K problem, the millennium bug, the Y2K bug, or simply Y2K) was a problem for both digital (computer-related) and non-digital documentation and data storage situations which resulted from the practice of abbreviating a four-digit year to two digits.

In computer programs, the practice of representing the year with two digits becomes problematic with logical error(s) arising upon "rollover" from x99 to x00. This has caused some date-related processing to operate incorrectly for dates and times on and after January 1, 2000 and on other critical dates which were billed "event horizons". Without corrective action, it was suggested that long-working systems would break down when the "...97, 98, 99, 00..." ascending numbering assumption suddenly became invalid. Companies and organizations worldwide checked, fixed, and upgraded their computer systems.

While no globally significant computer failures occurred when the clocks rolled over into 2000, preparation for the Y2K bug had a significant effect on the computer industry. There were plenty of Y2K problems, and that none of the glitches caused major incidents is seen as vindication of the Y2K preparation. However, some questioned whether the absence of computer failures was the result of the preparation undertaken or whether the significance of the problem had been overstated.

Many banks have responded to the Y2K problem by forcing full 4-digit year entries on check forms, which helps to prevent the error from occurring in accounting environments.

The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) was a draft agreement negotiated between members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 19951998. Its ostensible purpose was to develop multilateral rules that would ensure international investment was governed in a more systematic and uniform way between states. When its draft became public in 1997, it drew widespread criticism from civil society groups and developing countries, particularly over the possibility that the agreement would make it difficult to regulate foreign investors. After an intense global campaign was waged against the MAI by the treaty's critics, the host nation France announced in October 1998 that it would not support the agreement, effectively killing it due to the OECD's consensus procedures.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• noam
• chomsky
• Q&A
• question
• time
• new
• democratic
• institutions
• economy
• suffering
• injustice
• society
• Y2K
• air
• defense
• systems
• missiles
• china
• russia
• world
• banks
• interests
• explosive
• trade
• deal
• investor
• rights
• extreme
• treaty
• states
• private
• power
• corporations
• personhood
• NAFTA
• WTO
• OECD
• CBC
• Canada
• activism
• panic
• italian
• politics
• communism
• talk
• speech
• diy
• interview

[Dymdez]

Who gives a shit if he was "wrong" about Y2K, he's right about the important stuff. Btw, he said he doesn't know, which means he isn't eligible to be wrong. Let's focus on the important stuff here.

[photek1944]

Based on the facts at that time he does state that it's probably serious, but he doesn't actually know what will happen and says it over and over. I'm just saying that you can only criticize him for being wrong if he had actually said "Y2K will happen". Saying that it's "serious" doesn't mean he was wrong. Had Y2K happened, it would have been serious.

[littleflags]

surprised by the whole Y2K question. haha.

[tstruss912]

Poor Chomsky...he seems so hopeful here. Little did he know the whole 911 thing was coming..

[deceiver123m]

canada for the win - fuck corporations in canada and else where.

[johan3248]

As far as I know people did a lot of work to avoid y2k. Maybe the risk was serious, but it was avoided. Just like the risk of nuclear war has been serious but avoided this far. Or maybe we just were lucky.

It did not happen. Does it make Chomsky or others, who thought it was serious, wrong?

[soulfunkcity]

@photek1944 yes he did say that he was no specialist on it but then went on to say 'there's no doubt that its pretty serious' Did you actually watch the same video I did before you commented? He then went on to talk about missiles shooting and banks going down..I realise he didn't know alot but when he said theres no doubt that its pretty serious then he couldn't have been further from the truth.

[photek1944]

@soulfunkcity wrong? he said "i don't know", how could he be wrong then

[soulfunkcity]

well, im afraid chomsky was wrong about y2k.