How Bad Will Y2K Be?–Part Two

December 1, 1998

One of the questions I'm most asked these days is, How bad do you think Y2K will be? Yesterday I gave part of my answer. Today is the second half.

For the last few months I have had the privilege of moderating a number of debates and forums on the Y2K problem. And though I wouldn't call myself an expert, I have been able to meet and interview experts from various sides of this issue.

Originally there seemed to be a lot of people on the extremes of this issue: either believing that Y2K wasn't a problem or else believing it represented "the end of the world as we know it." Now I am finding that more and more people reside in the middle position simply because both extreme positions are becoming less tenable.

Yesterday I talked about why it seems harder and harder to say that Y2K will merely be "a small bump in the road." But I also believe it is becoming harder to say that the millennium bug will be the end of the world as we know it. Each week there are new reports of software breakthroughs that help fix the problem in record time. No one has found the "silver bullet" but many have found ways to make the problem more manageable.

Also, the original concern about embedded chips seems somewhat overblown. Most embedded chips are not date sensitive; in fact, they are even less date-sensitive than originally thought. Those that are, are being fixed or replaced.

This doesn't mean the Y2K problem won't be significant and affect all of us. But the doomsday scenarios first put forward by many don't seem as likely as they did a few months ago.

I'm Kerby Anderson of Probe Ministries, and that's my opinion.

© 1998 Probe Ministries International