Will this year`s Daylight Savings Time be the next Y2K?
It seemed like a good idea at the time. In 2005, as the price of gasoline spiked, Congress quietly passed a measure to begin daylight-saving time three weeks early this year. If the sun stays up later, went the logic, U.S. energy consumption would go down. The problem is that while they told us all of the switch, they didn`t tell our computers or our cell phones — or any of the zillion other digital clock-driven devices that have come into our lives since Congress last messed with the calendar in 1986...
On 3/12/2007 1:09:38 AM sansarf wrote: Oh wait this is only in the us? I heard it dst started on yt, but no mention anywere else.
Yeah I think it was only here, they did it to help reduce the use of fossil fuels. The theory is that this three weeks of more sunshine will make people wait longer to turn on their lights for the evening. I really don't see how it will help but I love that it's only March 12 and sunset isn't until 7:30!
The difference being between this and Y2K is that all you needed to do was reset the time.
As far as the Y2K bug, in some systems there WAS no way to set the date to 2000.
And all these people that say Y2K was overhyped, it was to some degree, however one of the reasons nothing happened was BECAUSE it was hyped so much that everyone fixed the essential systems.
On 8/12/2007 3:57:19 PM lone_justice wrote: Oh good, I get to be the first ass to say that it's daylight SAVING time. But I say "savings" too, so I'll just be a happy hypocrite.
On 2007-07-22 03:29:06.473 Tasdavil wrote: The difference being between this and Y2K is that all you needed to do was reset the time. As far as the Y2K bug, in some systems there WAS no way to set the date to 2000. And all these people that say Y2K was overhyped, it was to some degree, however one of the reasons nothing happened was BECAUSE it was hyped so much that everyone fixed the essential systems.
How much fixing did the "essential systems" really need? If the date goes to 1900 instead of 2000 does your computer, suddenly stop working? Were there no manual overrides in place to run the equipment without computers? Y2K was way overhyped...
On 2008-03-14 14:01:57.677 CowDung wrote: How much fixing did the "essential systems" really need? If the date goes to 1900 instead of 2000 does your computer, suddenly stop working? Were there no manual overrides in place to run the equipment without computers? Y2K was way overhyped...
Uhh...it wasn't just about personal computers, you know.
Because so many things had been computerized, there was the possibility that things like safety systems in power plants, navigation systems on planes, and other essential systems could fail.
On 2008-03-14 14:01:57.677 CowDung wrote: How much fixing did the "essential systems" really need? If the date goes to 1900 instead of 2000 does your computer, suddenly stop working? Were there no manual overrides in place to run the equipment without computers? Y2K was way overhyped...
It didn't reset to the year 1900 - It would have reset to the year 00. The problem was that core parts of computer programs (that had been written in the 50s and 60s when memory space was at a premium) only used the last two digets in the year.
The fear was that computers would not deal well with an unrecognizable year (the year 0), and would have major problems - especially computers dealing with power plants, navigational systems, and most importantly, weapons systems.
Because of all the 'hype', they went in and fixed all those systems before the year 2000.
On 2008-03-14 15:50:37.113 Wanderer wrote: It didn't reset to the year 1900 - It would have reset to the year 00. The problem was that core parts of computer programs (that had been written in the 50s and 60s when memory space was at a premium) only used the last two digets in the year. The fear was that computers would not deal well with an unrecognizable year (the year 0), and would have major problems - especially computers dealing with power plants, navigational systems, and most importantly, weapons systems. Because of all the 'hype', they went in and fixed all those systems before the year 2000.
So? What was it in the programs that actually needed to refer to a date in order to function?
On 2008-03-14 14:15:26.567 birdsong4j wrote: Uhh...it wasn't just about personal computers, you know. Because so many things had been computerized, there was the possibility that things like safety systems in power plants, navigation systems on planes, and other essential systems could fail.
I'm an engineer working in automation and controls. Very few controllers actually care about the date in order to function correctly--especially things that have to do with safety. There are also manual overrides on everything that is important. If the controllers go down for some reason (power surge, brownout, water leak, etc.) all the operator needs to do is turn a switch and turn the equipment back on...
On 2008-03-14 21:44:35.3 CowDung wrote: So? What was it in the programs that actually needed to refer to a date in order to function?
Take credit card auth for example.
The 6-digit date format could lead to valid cards not being authorized (this actually happened - one company got swipe machines that were not Y2k compliant and they had to get replacements).
Share 
