Y2K

[Ygor]

Has it ocurred to anyone else that the real reason for all the fuss is that without the first 2 digits, 2000 is a nothing year?

[Roy]

Even with the first two, it's a nothing year, just the last year of another decade/century/millennium.

2001 is the real new beginning.

[jokostel]

yup roy youre right,since there was no year 0... /forum/smile.gif

[C.C.]

Finally, some people with some common sense. You don't know how many times I've argued with people that the new millennium won't start until 2001. I'm now to a point that I don't even try. Besides the fact that if what they think about the monk who developed our calender being off by three years is true. I really do get sick of this world sometimes.....

[daveleau]

Hey I agree but look forward to the 2 huge parties!

[U-96]

Not only has the majority got the year wrong, but they also seem to forget that it is celebrating the 2000th anniversary of the birth of Jesus Christ (so what's Christmas for then?). All I see is people stocking up on booze and balloons.
Oh, and it also means diddly squat to anyone working on a diffent calendar, seeming as the Muslims are a few hundred years behind, and the Jews and Chinese are a few thousand in front.
It's just a fascination for round numbers that exists because this monkey has 10 things at the end of his arms.
Perhaps if we had used the number of arms instead of fingers, we'd have gotten here quicker? /forum/smile.gif

01010101
00101101
00111001
00110110


[This message has been edited by U-96 (edited 10-15-99).]

[drdeath]

we arent even correct in our year, either. we say we are in 1999 a.d. - the a.d. being latin for "the year of our lord" or, the year Jesus Christ was born. it was originally calculated by some monk in 300-something. we have since found out that he was off a little bit, and Jesus Christ was most likely born in 3 b.c. - putting us in the year 2002 already, going on 2003!

[Bronco]

STOP THE WORLD,I WANT TO GET OFF!