Talk:Year 2000 problem

Talk:Year 2000 problem


Opposing view - "fix on failure"

"The contrary view asserts that there were no, or very few, critical problems to begin with. This view also asserts that there would have been only a few minor mistakes and that a "fix on failure" approach would have been the most efficient and cost-effective way to solve these problems as they occurred."

No source or evidence is provided to support this assertion. It is highly controversial. "Fix on failure" would have been disastrous. It would have been ludicrously impractical for large corporations to fix all their business critical applications if they were failing simultaneously. Perhaps even worse, amidst the chaos it would have been impossible to detect serious Y2K errors in systems that were still running. Freddie Threepwood (talk) 10:32, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Come to think of it, fixing a problem with 2 bytes variable (0..65536) vs 4 bytes (0..4294967296) variable vs "byte" variable (0..255) vs "integer" (-32768..32767) with a little bugfix can be done so easily it can be done in a sneaky manner. 81.89.66.133 (talk) 15:05, 9 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Preventive work

This article doesn't really tell us how much the attempts to prevent problems took place3 and its effectiveness or uselessness. 136.36.176.51 (talk) 16:40, 1 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

>This article doesn't really tell us how much the attempts to prevent problems took place3 and its effectiveness or uselessness.
Every time you praise some company for implementing some measures in some place, you'll be greeted with "wp:IRS?"-like question 81.89.66.133 (talk) 15:00, 9 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.