|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawrence Lewis <lel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, August 04, 1998 2:53 PM
Subject: RE: Real Y2K issue
>Just because an embedded computer system has a date function doesn't mean
>it is used to "control" the device. Most of the time it is used for
>passive information. And even if it 's used for control information, it
>doesn't mean the device will fail when we roll over to 2000.
Hay, if my coffee maker stops working on Jan. 1, 2000, you'll here
from me.
>I've written many embedded systems - yes - even some which used a 2 digit
>year for the date. I can't think of one which used the date to control
>anything that would fail when we roll over to 2000. You know, many
>programmers were not as dumb as they're being made out to be. They put in
>code to check for unreasonable numbers.
Now we know who to blame.
>I think this is going to be the biggest "buy the rumor, sell the news"
>event in history. Anyways, that's the only rational way to play it. If
>I'm right, I make millions. If I wrong, the money I lose will be
>worthless anyways.
>
>BTW, the real problem will occur on January 18, 2038 when Microsoft's
> CTime class, which records time as the number of seconds since January
>1, 1970 rolls over. I think UNIX's time function has similar problems.
>It's always something!
I ran a shareware program called Y2000 that checks your computer to
see if it is year 2000 compliant. Shure enough mine will carp out in Jan.
2038. I'll be 89 years old then. Do I care? NOT {;-)
Good luck and good trading,
Ray Raffurty
|