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

Followups redirected to what I suspect is the right group; it's not a
group I read, so if you follow up to this post and don't send me a copy,
don't expect me to see it.

In article <d31d3207.0403012346.476e7eb@posting.google.com>,
Jbaloun <yonatan62@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Double digits are here to stay and the world goes on it's merry way.
> Besides if the programmers can rewrite all the code ever written in a
> few years, they can fix anything. Lights stayed on. Every line of code
> in its proper place. The coding job of all time, and nobody noticed.

Um, speak for yourself.

I worked as an accounting clerk, 1998-2002, and every job that lasted
more than a couple of ws, up to at least early 2001, was driven in
one way or another by Y2K-related computer system conversions.  Even
when the actual Y2K problems themselves were fixed, the companies
involved were either working to take advantage of the added features
of their new programs, or upgrading other systems that hadn't been
vulnerable to Y2K but had been identified, in the Y2K planning, as
outdated.

So *I*, anyway, noticed plenty.

And many thanks, you guys, for the most sustained employment I had in
my career as a temp.

Joe Bernstein

--
Joe Bernstein, bookseller and writer                   joe@sfbooks.com
<http://www.panix.com/~josephb/>

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 05:22:27 +0000, Richard Brennan
<rich@skag.vispa.com> wrote:
 
>
>Or "Might grow soft"!!

Or 'Mike Crosauft' was here!

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:47:02 -0600, Peter Lacey
<lacey@mb.sympatico.ca> wrote:

>Hear, hear.  I suggest that the entire ng, for its entire history, be copie
d
>onto century-class cd's or dvd's or something, and placed in a safety depos
it
>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!

I second that proposition!

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:26:15 -0600, LX-i <lxi0007@netscape.net> wrote:

>That's 'cause you folks have Habitant...

It takes a lot to crack a smile on tight-assed Ontarians!

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:03:08 GMT, "canuckistani"
<dontwantanymedspissoff@shaw.ca> wrote:

> Here one would be able to enjoy the rants of the ever-time retentive Doctor John.[
/color]

I haven't been able to look at my Victorinox watch with the sme eyes
since...

> Here one would chuckle when reading one of Mr. Bernier's many priceless posts.[/co
lor]

Tabarnac, 'tweren't nuthin' really!

I'se was jes practicin' mah Anglish is all!

Xref: kermit comp.software.year-2000:154202 comp.programming:127928 comp.lan
g.cobol:85874 news.groups:133607

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 14:02:20 +0000, Dr John Stockton
<spam@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>But the OP is in principle slightly premature : nothing should be done
>until the effects of tomorrow's date, only presumably negligible at
>present - have finished.

Indeed, old pendulum!

I second this proposition!

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:05:17 -0600, "Crimefighter"
<crimefighter@deadspam.com> wrote:

>I'd say if you do a remove vote on the group, that any RELEVANT traffic
>about the Y2K program be redirected to comp.software.misc.  I can't see
>anyone having to deal with the Y2K problem anymore.

Fare thee well then!

On 29 Feb 2004 08:46:41 -0500, bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman)
wrote:

>Put the damned newsgroup out of its misery.

Such a tease!

Xref: kermit comp.software.year-2000:154210 comp.programming:127935 comp.lan
g.cobol:85877 news.groups:133622

On 2 Mar 2004 05:08:10 -0500, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:

>zzzzzZZZZZZzzzz... zzzzzaaaaaAAAAWWWWWWWW...
>zzzznnnnuuuuUURRRRKKKHHHhhhhh.... whuh? huh?  oh... sorry, just... resting
>my eyes, please, go right ahead, you were saying...

Cabal fools are plottin' King-o!

In article <mmeo40lk2jrgpsdgusdtmnlo1pc65fbl95@4ax.com>, berlutte@sympatico.ca wrote:[color
=darkred]
>On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:47:02 -0600, Peter Lacey
><lacey@mb.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> 
> bet 
>
>I second that proposition![/color]

What about the year 9995?  I bet there's lots of code with 4-digit years
waiting to cause disaster in 10000.

- Gerry Quinn