On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 13:20:37 -0500, Zootal
wrote:
I suppose I should just stop now and call for references. Your opinion
piece, being devoid of said references, is nothing more then that - your
opinion.

Since you were involved, I'm sure you know that most of the code
involved was custom and not available for public review. That makes
references difficult. You can find some in IEEE Spectrum though.

With all due respect, you do not know what you are talking about. I was
there. I was researching and documenting and in some cases fixing Y2K
"problems". And it was grossly over-stated and over-hyped.

I'm happy that the systems you were involved in were in relatively
good shape. That doesn't mean they all were. I could turn your request
for references back on you.

And why are we rehashing this now anyhow?

Because someone brought it up. Hey, how long you been around Usenet?
You tellin' me there needs to be a REASON to rehash something? Bah.

It's ancient history, at least
until the year 2100 rolls around. Then we are going to go through the
same thing all over again LOL.

Yes, I fear that's true. Oh, it won't be quite the same thing -- the
world of DP (excuse me, IT) will have changed enormously. It will get
new names about every 25 years, just to keep it fresh -- DP, IT, what
next? At present everyone is being careful about dates. There will
never again be the pressure to save two bytes, since storage is so
cheap now. But in 50 years, no one working will have gone through it.
Handwritten dates will always drop the century, and eventually this
will slip into data systems. Exactly how, I don't know, but somehow it
will. Have we fixed the 2039 problems yet? Not AFAIK.

(And apropos a response, I agree with "we". I won't be alive, but "we"
as a profession and the human race will go through it. Those ignorant
of history etc.)

Edward