On Sun, 2 Jan 2000, Nate Duehr wrote: > That's pretty funny, if you think about it. The National Institute of > Standards is either breaking a standard themselves, or isn't Y2K compliant. > > HA! That's great! > Someone else reported someplace else seeing a time update of Jan 01, 19100 right after the rollover. I am wondering if this is the same source of the problem.