3 ms·

Does anyone know what the nature of the bug is? The article lacked on this aspect unfortunately.

• ugh 17y ago
  None of the many German articles I read about the topic mentioned the exact nature of the bug.
• ABrandt 17y ago
  My first guess would be that the software somehow recognized "2010" as "1910". Not sure exactly what dating structure would lead to this though.
• aarongough 17y ago
  Perhaps they thought they would improve on the 2 digit method of representing years, and used a single digit method instead? ie: 2009(9) -> 2010(0) I would be pretty sad if it was a bug as obvious as this though. No idea what the real bug is likely to be...
• sp332 17y ago
  I thought this was discussed earlier this week, but I can't find a link anywhere. The representation of the date is ambiguous about decimal/hexadecimal. So some devices are reading "10" as equal to 16, yielding the year 2016 instead of 2010.