Having watched another video saying Y2K wasn’t real - my standard clarification

[dacig@mastodon.social]

@jonn_blanchard Sorry to be a little sceptical (and not wanting to demean anybody's job) but...I don't remember any major disruption.
How to reconcile that with thousands (millions) of systems that were under peril to fail, and yet not one big enough to notice.
I mean, how come no major issue fell through the cracks? Were engineers 100% succesfull?

[jonn_blanchard@retrochat.online]

@dacig they did, there are accounts of things that failed. And not every system was affected, more “modern” systems that weren’t designed in an age where every byte was important didn’t have the same issues

[markhburton@mstdn.social]

@jonn_blanchard
Y2K was indeed real.

As an aside, the best, tongue in cheek, marketing ploy of those days was the Y2K compliant vegetable brush.

[jonn_blanchard@retrochat.online]

@markhburton so many companies had weird products to take advantage of the worry

[deborahh@cosocial.ca]

@jonn_blanchard @ShaulaEvans same

[jfrench@cupoftea.social]

@jonn_blanchard being on call on Jan 1 2000 was the most lucrative hangover I ever had

[mansr@society.oftrolls.com]

@sverx @jonn_blanchard I'd like to know what kind of reasoning led someone to implement the 100 year exception for leap years while deeming the 400 year one too much effort when they could have got away (until 2100) with doing neither.

[sverx@mastodon.gamedev.place]

@mansr @jonn_blanchard I remember discussing with colleagues back then and only *some* of them knew the rule about the 100 years exception, but *none* of them knew about the rule of the 400 years exception to the exception.

I bet also some of the people fixing the programs for Y2K were unaware of some of those rules...