AI and Y2K

My young adult kids and many other readers of my blog have no idea what Y2K means and why it could be relevant here in September 2026 with a discussion focused on AI and how AI could boom and doom the world as we know it. I believe there are several similarities between the Y2K experience and the current discussion about AI which I will discuss below.

With that said, let me first go back to the late 1990s. For the record, Y2K stands for the year 2000. In the 1990s there was legitimate concern that older computer programs using only two digits might interpret 00 as 1900 instead of 2000. This was indeed a legitimate concern for banking, hospital medical equipment and healthcare, government payments for social security, aviation, and public utilities. Thankfully, a serious and muti-billion-dollar initiative was undertaken by the federal and state governments and private business to test and find systems that used two-digit years; rewrite and replace software; and develop contingency plans in the event remedial steps were inadequate or incomplete. Thankfully, January 1, 2000, came and went with no major issues with the electric grid, hospitals and medical equipment, air traffic system, or agencies of the federal government.

But to be sure, this smooth landing did not mean that there was not a considerable amount of worry and angst experienced by large numbers of citizens in our country. Even without the presence of today’s 24/7 social media, there was a considerable amount of fear mongering in society. I remember very well the warnings that refrigerators and microwaves would fail; cars would not start; medical equipment would not operate; planes would fall from the sky; and there would be great civil unrest throughout the country as had never been experienced before. Thankfully, none of these things occurred. But many people were alarmed and went to great lengths to prepare for what they believed to be an Armageddon type experience with the purchase of a one-year supply of freeze-dried food, bottled water, gas generators, fuel, guns and ammunition, cash in safes, flashlights, batteries and radios. For businesses selling these supplies, Y2K was surely a good deal. For the people who needlessly purchased the items, a great disappointment.

For anyone even casually tuned into current news and events, it is virtually impossible to miss the boom and doom discussion about AI. As I discussed in my recent blog on Data Centers, https://www.ralphwilson1954.com/post/data-centers, on the positive front, the construction of Data Centers to provide the computing power for AI will generate thousands of temporary construction jobs and hundreds of permanent jobs while raising concerns among residents that electric and water rates will skyrocket along with air and water pollution. AI itself is transforming medicine and healthcare, agriculture, military, construction, manufacturing, and other areas of society in beneficial ways never imagined. But there are also concerns that AI development is moving much too fast and is now capable or will soon be able to take on a life of its own outside the ability of human control with the possibility of causing havoc in society with crippling cyber-attacks in critical areas of society such as banking, healthcare, public utilities, and national defense. Just last week, Jacob Coxon, one of the young super stars from Anthropic, abruptly resigned citing his concern that the major AI players had moved too fast in AI development and had not taken steps to place guard rails around AI to prevent malevolent behavior from AI. In response to his warning, the leadership at AI leaders Anthropic, Microsoft, and OpenAI all agreed that AI development was moving too fast and suggested that the federal government should step in with regulations for AI to ensure that appropriate safeguards were in place. These companies also seek an antitrust exemption for coordination of certain AI business-related activities. Conversely, Meta and Nvidia urged caution in regulations for AI. President Trump is adamant in his opposition to regulations for AI which he believes will only serve to benefit China in its AI initiative.

I am not able to confirm or deny the concerns expressed by Mr. Coxon regarding the risks associated with AI development. I also express no expertise on how any AI regulations might impact America’s competitive position versus China. But I do have some thoughts regarding the reaction of the leaders in the AI space who are advocating regulations for AI. If these leaders believe that current AI development poses risks to society, why have they not taken steps themselves to address these concerns? These leaders are the brain trust for AI and must surely understand what safeguards should be put in place to protect society from harm by AI misbehavior. They should also know better than anyone else that if they are producing a product or service that can harm society, the plaintiffs’ bar is waiting in the wings to file class action lawsuits against their companies to seek to recover trillions of dollars from these deep pocketed companies. So why are these leaders now clamoring for government regulation of AI? There surely must be reasons why they would advocate that the government take steps that they could and should take themselves. Could it be that government regulation could be beneficial to their business model? To be sure, if the government imposes regulations for AI, the leading AI companies will have increased business costs for regulatory compliance. But these regulatory costs can largely be passed on to customers and will be creating helpful barriers to entry for new companies which would become competitors to the current AI leaders. Just behold the “brilliance” of this strategy: The AI leaders get credit for initiating government regulations for their existing businesses which will likely provide a protective “moat” around their businesses since these regulations will likely increase costs for any new AI competitors thus making it more difficult for new AI competitors to enter the AI space! Voila, the financially powerful AI companies become even more financially powerful!

So, what lessons can be learned from Y2K and current AI development? While Y2K presented legitimate risks for society leading up to the year 2000, these challenges were appropriately addressed even as many individuals and businesses were able to exploit fears associated with Y2K to enrich themselves. In the case of AI, the AI “Genie” is out of the bottle and there is an on-going boom and doom risk/reward assessment taking place. If Congressional legislation is ultimately required, then fine.  One can only hope that this risk assessment can take place with voices of reason prevailing over the voices of fear mongering and business self-interest. I am confident that, just in the case of our current digital landscape, good men will use AI for the good and betterment of society in ways which cannot even be fathomed at this time, while evil men will use AI to create untold evil and suffering in society. But I have absolutely no doubt who is ultimately in charge of how AI will impact our nation and the world. His word in the Book of 2 Peter Chapter 3 makes very clear that the world will continue until the time the Lord wishes for it to come to an end and how Believers should live until that time comes. This is where my trust and focus lie.

God bless you and thank you for the privilege of your time in reading my blog.

•