Count me as interested in seeing support for that. I will look at any resources you provide. If I am convinced, then I will cease thinking that Y2K was a problem which required addressing, and I won't ever post anything indicating that it WAS again.
From the same site that provided the link you noted, there is also this:
Excerpts:
"This project had a number of goals. First: to find out if Y2K was a success, or just hype. The answer seems to be yes and yes. The problem was very real and the consequences for doing nothing were huge. There were also news organizations, technology consultants, religious leaders, and the like, who spent lots of energy hyping the problem beyond reality, often for their own gains."
and
"The primary goal of those working on Y2K was to keep everything working. If on January 1, 2000, it looked like nothing happened, then their mission was accomplished. In the vast majority of cases, this is exactly what happened. ... And so we never noticed the programmers working through the night, the senators meeting with technology executives, the Federal Reserve inspectors combing through bank processes. Everyone did their job, and nearly on cue, the rest of us forgot they were there."
In thinking that Y2K was not a hoax, I am defining Y2K as a common software problem that needed to be fixed, or the computer system with the software problem might fail. The above paragraph says "the problem was very real" -- that is the problem that I am referring to. If the hoax you're referring to is the claims of disaster associated with this software problem, then I don't really have a problem with it being called a hoax.
I hope that's clear.
Oh, yes, very clear.
I'm an Enterprise Software Architect. Mainly Java these days (and some PHP recently), but my roots are in Cobol, which is what a lot of the y2k code problems were written in. I worked at CSC's Financial Services Group for 8 years, from 94 to 02. I was hip-deep in Y2k work. We made a lot of money.
Pretty much, all software has bugs. The reporting that there were bugs was real. There were plenty of y2k bugs, and companies needed to patch the bugs.
The predictions of global chaos were *not* real. There was zero chance of any of them being ignored to the point of causing global issues. It doesn't work that way. It was all hype. Just a 'scary story' to get people to watch their shows.
I find it very instructive, your position on this. To each their own, of course. But for me, this really speaks to the question of credibility on this kind of press 'scary story'.
I'm sorry -- I didn't mean that to come out quite so . . . rude. I don't mean it in quite that way.
I'm at work, and was typing hurriedly.
Hope you can forgive me for that.