3 ms·

I think you're a bit backward on Y2K; instead of being down on those who correctly said that the hypsters were full of it, you should be irritated at the hypste

I think you're a bit backward on Y2K; instead of being down on those who correctly said that the hypsters were full of it, you should be irritated at the hypsters who were effectively claiming that you and the other programmers who patched the problems before they became problems were too incompetent to do your jobs.

thaumaturgy 17y ago
That's not the sense I get in most discussions like this, although I hadn't thought of it that way before so it's possible that I'm letting my own biases come into play here. The sense I get is that the Y2K bug was a non-issue to begin with -- the usual evidence for this being that there were very few problems following January 1 -- which I think really marginalizes the huge amount of extra effort that a lot of people put into making sure that it would be a non-issue. _If_ legions of programmers hadn't done their jobs, and done them very well, then the hypsters probably wouldn't have been very far off the mark.