It seemed for a while that all the doomsday predictions surrounding the millennium had actually found a scientific basis. There was no hope - the world would definitely end on January 1st, 2000. The source of the problem in these scenarios was the year 2000 (that's "Y2K" in abbreviated computerspeak) bug. It seems that when computer systems were being developed in the 1960s, memory was very expensive.
To minimise what was saved, programmers developed the computers to read only two digits in the "year" slot in dates. Thus they converted 1999 into 99, which people do all the time in ordinary life and is very space efficient if you have a database with a lot of birth dates, for example. But, for the most part, these computers were left to convert 00 into 1900.
Consequently, when 00 appears next January, which is of course 2000 and not 1900, the systems will "fall over". Obviously this was somewhat foreseeable. Those programmers who were thinking ahead anticipated, however, that as computers developed they would use some other system. In fact, it was more expedient as time went by for most institutions to update original systems, complete with the Y2K problem, rather than re-do the entire system.
About 10 years ago, the first references to the Y2K bug began appearing in newspapers. Gradually a sense of panic and horror began to permeate the media, which has been delighting in the potential horror which might ensue. In the past couple of years the various industries dependent on computers have begun to sort out the problem. However, three years doesn't seem like a lot of time to fix every single date-dependent system on the planet - apart from which, it costs a fortune and many countries just won't have the resources. (See `a day in the life' for an account of what's involved in fixing the bug.)
That's just about acceptable if it just means a couple of microwaves will malfunction, but the serious concern lies with something like a satellite reading 00 as 1900, thinking, "oh my God, I haven't been invented yet", and plummeting to earth on top of a suburban housing estate. Increasingly, systems in Ireland are being made "Y2K compliant". There may yet be technical hitches, but it seems that they will only be minor.
One way or another, it is in the interest of larger industries to reassure the public. Stories in the media of people getting mortgage bills dating back to 1900 could lead to wads under the mattress and not a lot in the bank vaults, so the general line has more or less become "everything is under control". But we don't really know exactly what may happen. Some of the power industries seem to be taking an honest approach.
Referring to its tests for Y2K compliance, Canada's national electrical supply company issued a statement: "Most entities report nothing which would have opened a circuit" - i.e. cut off power. Which is great, except that it would be a lot more reassuring if all entities reported the power wouldn't be cut off. This makes for wonderful doom and gloom. However, you have to look even further behind the story: in this as in other Y2K reports there lies a fear of litigation. Off the record, workers at that electric company were saying they had found absolutely no potential problems.
But, until the day comes, there are no guarantees one way or the other. So on advice from its lawyers the company had to issue a statement which left things that bit more vague, which in fact deliberately suggested problems had arisen - so that if anything at all went wrong, they at least couldn't be sued for having misled the public. So what's it to be, accidental World War 3 on January 1st, or a couple of cold dinners out of the microwave? There is no certainty one way or the other - except that speculation about the former will sell papers.
Given the complexity of the possible outcomes, the stories that the media is fed may, of necessity, lack a certain veracity. Some "experts" are doubtless making a fortune on this uncertainty. It's best, perhaps, to stick with the old adage: "Don't believe everything you read." Only time will tell.
