Nov 16, 2019, 6:15 PM
-
What if Y2K and the alleged glitch was a cover for the bug where shareware could be outwitted in terms of the trial period before purchase, by changing the clock backwards?
In that case, why not just change the merchandised software implement for shareware clock timing, sold by some nefarious organization as a utility packet?
They'd logically do it for free, and in public.
-
Um. What?
-
Why do people think the Y2K issues weren't real? The reason we didn't see anything seriously fuck up is because of how much work people did to prepare and update systems so they didn't break.
-
Why do people think the Y2K issues weren't real? The reason we didn't see anything seriously fuck up is because of how much work people did to prepare and update systems so they didn't break.
I was literally just talking to someone about this yesterday. It's weird when something from 20 years ago that's super niche now and largely forgotten comes up twice in 24 hours.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
-
Why do people think the Y2K issues weren't real? The reason we didn't see anything seriously fuck up is because of how much work people did to prepare and update systems so they didn't break.
Saying the quiet parts out loud since 1996.
-
I really wish that wasn't accurate.
-
What if Y2K and the alleged glitch was a cover for the bug where shareware could be outwitted in terms of the trial period before purchase, by changing the clock backwards?
In that case, why not just change the merchandised software implement for shareware clock timing, sold by some nefarious organization as a utility packet?
They'd logically do it for free, and in public.
I have read this like ten times and I still don't understand what you're getting at.
The big scare over Y2k was really about preventing people from pirating Winzip???? Or........?????????
