Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site talcott.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!teddy!panda!talcott!kendall
From: kendall@talcott.UUCP (Sam Kendall)
Newsgroups: net.bugs,net.flame,net.puzzle
Subject: Re: Re: Computer bugs in the year 2000
Message-ID: <257@talcott.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 23-Jan-85 20:01:51 EST
Article-I.D.: talcott.257
Posted: Wed Jan 23 20:01:51 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 25-Jan-85 08:03:06 EST
References: <820@reed.UUCP> <318@enmasse.UUCP>
Organization: Sociology Dept., Harvard Univ.
Lines: 22
Xref: watmath net.bugs:511 net.flame:8015 net.puzzle:513

> ... [T]his notion that when we
> reach the year 2000, computers will not accept the new date.

Yeah, this thought occurred to me when I took COBOL years ago and found
that data was encoded in decimal, and years often encoded in 2 digits.
I don't know about the IBM OS creation date/temporary file problem, but
other than that, the COBOL two-decimal-digit-year problem is the major
one.  This is a pretty common thing to do in COBOL programs; COBOL is
the most-used computer language (I think, and in any case it certainly
is in the business/bureaucratic world); there are plenty of programs
that have been running for years, and for which the sources have been
lost.

I am posting this because I think a lot of people have never seen a
COBOL program, and so don't realize why the year 2000 will be trouble.

I think, though, that IBM will get moving on this problem around the
year 1995, if only so that the society on which they depend for profits
will continue to exist.

	Sam Kendall	  {allegra,ihnp4,ima,amd}!wjh12!kendall
	Delft Consulting Corp.	    decvax!genrad!wjh12!kendall