@scalt
Think of the Millennium Bug: there was massive scaremongering about it, and it turned out to be a non-event;
It was only a "non event" because there were huge numbers of people working their arses off for the years leading up to it, businesses and organisations spending huge sums of money replacing ageing computers and software, etc.
In the two firms I worked at in the 90s, first being 93-96 and the second being 96 onwards, it was the most important thing we discussed at Board and management meetings, and even though both firms were pretty small (dozens rather than hundreds of staff), both spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on new computers/software and engaged extra staff/IT consultants to oversee the transition, and ensure all old/legacy data was converted into a usable form in newly created archives in new computers/software.
We were under no illusion that our entire IT infrastructures would have collapsed had we not done it causing business failure. It wasn't scaremongering, it was real. We did "simulations" using isolated computers (removed from the main network and created a new secondary "dummy" network) and resetting the inbuilt computer date (BIOS) past 1/1/2000, entering forward dated transactions etc with a date post 1/1/2000, and our systems did indeed crash spectacularly rendering them unusable.
As a result of the sheer amount of money and hard work to virtually replace our entire computer network (plus printers, scanners, modems, software, operating systems, etc)., 1/1/2000 came and passed with a whimper, as had been planned for, with no problem at all.