Don't mistake a defused bomb for a dud.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preparedness_paradox

I remember the reality of all the work needed to avoid issues.

As others have stated, the lack of visible effect is not the same thing as there never having been a land mine in the first place.

I can tell you anecdotally that on 12/31/2000 I was hanging with some friends. At 12PM UTC we turned on the footage from London. At first it appeared to be a fiery hellscape armageddon. while it turned out to just be fireworks with a wierd camera angle, there was a moment where we were concerned something was actually happening. Most of us in the room were technologists, and while we figured it'd all be no big deal, we weren't *sure* and it very much alarmed us to see it on the screen.

Tell us you weren't involved in Y2K iwithout telling us you weren't involved in Y2K.

Made me think of Mark Fisher's Y2K Positive text:

> At the Great Midnight at the century's end, signifying culture will flip over into a number-based counterculture, retroprocessing the last 100 years. Whether global disaster ensues or not, Y2K is a singularity for cybernetic culture. It's time to get Y2K positive.

Mark Fisher (2004). Y2K Positive in Mute.

While there was a lot of FUD in the media, there were also a lot of scenarios that were actually possible but were averted due to a LOT of work and attention ahead of time. It should be looked at, IMO, as a success of communication, warnings, and a lot of effort that nothing of major significance happened.

Exciting times with an anticlimactic end; I was in middle school, relishing the chaos of the adult world.

Another victim of the preparedness paradox.