Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000

From: Peter Lacey (lacey_at_mb.sympatico.ca)
Date: 02/27/04 

Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:47:02 -0600

Richard Heathfield wrote:

> Jamie Andrews[...] wrote:
>
> > This is a discussion concerning the removal (rmgrouping)
> > of the newsgroup "comp.software.year-2000". This is not a
> > formal call for votes, nor is it a threat of rmgrouping the
> > newsgroup without a vote.
>
> I have no opinion on the continued existence or otherwise of the named
> group, but I would just like to take the opportunity to point out that the
> root cause of the Year 2000 problem - i.e. the belief that storing the last
> two digits of the year is sufficient - /remains/ an issue. It's as if
> people have said "okay, the Y2K thing is over, we can get back to normal
> again" (where 'normal' means 'the same lame, broken way we did things
> before').
>
> What's worse, some Y2K "solutions" involved the use of a fixed century
> window, which simply delays some of the kinds of problems that we faced
> just over four years ago. (By "fixed century window" I mean, basically, if
> yy < WINDOW then cc = 20 else cc = 19. Lame, or what?)
>
> Even if this were not the case (which it most certainly is, alas), our
> descendants are nevertheless going to have precisely the same problem as we
> did, in only 90 years or so. And they won't thank us for it.
>
> <snip>
>
> --
> Richard Heathfield : binary@eton.powernet.co.uk
> "Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
> C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
> K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton

Hear, hear. I suggest that the entire ng, for its entire history, be copied
onto century-class cd's or dvd's or something, and placed in a safety deposit
box to be opened in 2095. We won't be here to see it but I'd be willing to bet
that much of what's on the ng will be relevant then. Ho ho!

PL

Relevant Pages