Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 16:02:31 -0700 From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: dag-erli@ifi.uio.no (Dag-Erling Coidan =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= ) Cc: des@FreeBSD.ORG, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/release Makefile Message-ID: <199807092302.QAA12959@austin.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "10 Jul 1998 00:38:21 %2B0200." <xzp3ecay7j6.fsf@hrotti.ifi.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> As I see it, the Y2K problem is not about how computers represent > dates, it's about how people think about dates. That seems backwards to me. People never get confused about 2-digit years. There's not a FreeBSD user alive who would think that a SNAP year of "00" meant anything except 2000. (Actually, I encountered a user once who was probably that dumb, but I won't mention any names. :-) When the millennium comes, people will be writing dates like "6/29/00" (in the US), and everybody will know exactly what is meant. Humans don't have a Y2K problem. Computers, on the other hand have very real problems if they do simple-minded comparisons of 2-digit years. As Chris Dillon pointed out, some people might get confused by a 2-digit SNAP year, in that they might think there's a Y2K problem when there really isn't one. But that's not a Y2K problem, it's a meta-Y2K problem. Sheesh, I'm starting to sound like Terry. :-) -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Self-knowledge is always bad news." -- John Barth To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199807092302.QAA12959>