Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

news.ycombinator.com

331–340 of 385 posts

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was also really difficult to detect bugs since no good testing paradigms had been established yet. This created an exploitable opportunity for the few who knew how to write automated tests. During the Y2K panic Sun Microsystems (IIRC) announced that they would pay a bounty of ~$1,000 per Y2K bug that anyone found in their software (due to the lack of automated tests, they didn't even know how to find their Y2K bug…

That's a fantastic story, I'm impressed the professor didn't try to take the whole settlement.

Some people have character.

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#332

Yes, the y2k crisis was real, or more accurately, would have been a serious crisis if people had not rushed and spent lots of money to deal with it ahead of time. In many systems it would have been no big deal if unfixed, but there were a huge number of really important systems that would have been a serious problem had they not been fixed. Part of the challenge was that this was an immovable deadline, often if thing…

I remember hearing a story on NPR years ago years after Y2K with someone knowledgeable on the subject that addressed this question. He gave basically the same answer you did: a lot of effort went into avoiding disaster and a lot of people treated it after the fact as if it was hype or hysteria. I recall the interview because it changed my significantly thinking on the subject. (I wasn't in the industry at the time of…

Yep, this was something that many firms were delaying spending on it. It's pretty frustrating because this seems normal. Only do something about an issue when the time horizon is near rather than take it on when it's further out.

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#333
I worked at IBM as an intern during the crossover, and there was a TON of internal activity. It might seem like there was nothing going on, but in fact, there were a lot of interns (like our entire intern class of about 200 that I know of, across entire IBM in all disciplines, research, database, microprocessors, AIX, QA, mainframes etc) who were basically doing the same thing - Y2K readiness for our respective departments.

I worked in QA in one of their bank teller application development branch offices, so all I did for weeks was enter in date times between 99 and 00 into the software and test that the fixes were successful.

The unique thing about Y2K was that the problem was well understood and came with an actual deadline, so you could project manage around it.

Any normal bug couldn't be project managed this way, and you can't just throw interns at regular problems, whereas with Y2K, if you had the money, you can just assign people to look at every line of code to look for date handling code.

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I've heard, a number of IT departments used it as justification to dump legacy systems. For example, at a former employer of mine, a big justification for getting rid of the IBM-compatible mainframe and a lot of legacy systems which ran on it (various in-house apps written in COBOL and FORTRAN) was Y2K. In reality, they probably could have updated the mainframe systems to be Y2K-compliant. But, they didn't…

Worked in a project to migrate a huge and critical .gov database from an AS400 nobody understood anymore to Microsoft SQL Server. We had to guess some of the values in some bitwise fields through trial and error. Made it with a few weeks to spare - nobody noticed.

I'm quite surprised no-one understood an AS/400 in 2000 - they were still pretty current and an important part of the IBM range, surely.

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#335

Yes, the y2k crisis was real, or more accurately, would have been a serious crisis if people had not rushed and spent lots of money to deal with it ahead of time. In many systems it would have been no big deal if unfixed, but there were a huge number of really important systems that would have been a serious problem had they not been fixed. Part of the challenge was that this was an immovable deadline, often if thing…

> treated it after the fact as if it was hype or hysteria I agree with everything you and the parent said, but there was also hype and hysteria on top of it all - especially among the communities of preppers, back to the landers, and eco-extremist types. I met entire communities of technophobes who declared I was just ignorant or 'a sheep' and refused to believe me when I tried to explain that the industry was workin…

True. The first image that pops into my head when I hear Y2K is a Simpsons joke where airplanes and satellites start falling from the sky and landing in their backyard:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0bBYK-7ZiU

Oh, and Dick Clark melts.

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is always such an annoying problem: 1. Shine light on problem and make sure people hear about it 2. People respond and fix it 3. Outcome not as bad as you said it could be /because it was fixed/ 4. Some time later "That wasn't a big deal" No, it wasn't that big of a deal because we worked hard to fix it!

Mark my words, if the containment measures work and Covid-19 goes away, this is exactly what people will be saying. Drives me crazy.

Yeah, I'm not sure if the original question was asked because of this, but I've had a couple conversations where we've compared the COVID-19 situation to Y2K.

Even in this case, we have evidence of what happens from delaying response (eg: China, Italy) yet if proactive steps like shutting down schools, events and gatherings are effective you'll get people complaining it was all an overreaction.

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#337

I have always wondered the same thing. I came to the conclusion that it's pretty difficult to determine that. I lived and worked as a software developer through the Y2K "crisis" (although I wasn't working on solving the crisis myself). Everyone was very worried about it. Nothing really went wrong in the end. Was that because there was no problem? Or because everyone was worried about it and actually solved the proble…

I think so too, but there is some evidence of a lot of legacy systems needing critical updates. Manufacturing, oil processing, military hardware and other stuff. The problem was that it was nearly impossible to understand how failures would manifest. Just that there will be failures and some of them might be very critical. Luckily, all the important stuff got fixed in time that everything went pretty smoothly, but there were still some problems in non-critical systems.

That said, if we need to jump start the economy again, maybe we could come up with a fake problem this time. How about we say that 2025 will be a huge problem for many critical IT systems? Or does a timestamp does produce a nice round number in the near future that is a good sell?

edit: There is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#338
post #231
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the Living Computer Museum in Seattle they have an IBM S/360 that prints out we’re in year 19120.

I’m sure I’ve seen websites in the last year or two from the 90s that still do this

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#339

Yes, the y2k crisis was real, or more accurately, would have been a serious crisis if people had not rushed and spent lots of money to deal with it ahead of time. In many systems it would have been no big deal if unfixed, but there were a huge number of really important systems that would have been a serious problem had they not been fixed. Part of the challenge was that this was an immovable deadline, often if thing…

> Yes, it's true that all software occasionally has bugs. But when all the software fails at the same time, a lot of the backup systems simultaneously fail, and you lose the infrastructure to fix things.

This is especially important if you think about what things were like in the late-90s. As a teenage geek in Northern Ireland I read about the the first tech boom, but locally there was very little exploitation of tech and you were an anomaly if you had dial-up internet at home. There was very limited expertise available to fix your computer systems in the best of time.

Big companies had complex systems, but they could also afford contracts with vendors in the UK mainland, or Eire, to fix systems. It was much more limited for other companies. While people were generally not relying on personal computers too much, small businesses had just reached that tipping point where Y2K would have been painful. As a result, they took action.

I only got to visit the US a few times in the early-nineties and it seemed so futuristic (I got a 286 PC in '93 to use alongside my Amiga). I imagined the Y2K problem as being much more painful in the US, and I wasn't accounting for the distribution of expertise.

One great experience was summer training courses that the government had organised with a IT training company in Belfast. These were free and it was a like a rag tag army of teenagers and older geeks from both sides of what was quite a divided community. The systems we were dealing with were fairly simple. It was mostly patching Windows, Sage Accounting, upgrading productivity apps (there was more than Microsoft Office in use) etc., but the trainer was normally teaching more advanced stuff like networking and motherboard repair so we spent a lot of time on that.

Re: Ask HN: Was the Y2K crisis real?

#340
The company I'm consulting for just went through another Y2K scare. A fairly large financial institution using two digits to track the year. They pushed out the problem last time by updating the code to treat 00 - 20 as 2000 to 2020 because obviously 20 years is enough time to put in the real fix right? Well they bought themselves 30 more years, so maybe it'll actually be fixed by 2050.
Post reply on HN