Well I won't say you are stupid. But do you realize we are talking about a time format "designed" 40+ years ago. And some cpus are still compatible with chips from 80's 90's. To imagine all that will go away and be solved in 20 years is not logical.
Also, the problem isn't with PCs (which will be upgraded) but the billions of IoT, industrial controls, and other embedded devices that lack easy upgrade paths. Things like elevators, pressure release valves, cars.
We're already bordering on it being a little late. Y2K sucked for the developers of 1999, but they had few computers to worry about. They where less interconnected and all the Unix/Linux based system wasn't at risk. Imaging trying to patch or replace just 20% of the embedded devices when we get to 2036.
What fascinates me is that we didn't start addressing the issue right after Y2K. Perhaps we would have if more computers had failed.
How different is computing now compared to 1996?
Do you consider 2017 vs 2038 to probably have more difference or less difference than 1996 vs 2017?
If more difference, do you expect technology to accelerate faster in the next 21 years than the last 21 years, and why?
Distributed computing went from being "something that is possible" to "the default". Otherwise, all the standard resources such as processors, RAM, disk, and networking all got faster and cheaper. USB revolutionized plugging in peripherals. All the CRT displays are gone.
From the Linux command line point of view, you're more likely to use tools written with python, perl, or ruby, but the big change there is package managers. You don't download source or binaries from FTP sites as often as you did in the old days.
Even if they don't run the actual hardware, they're likely to be running the same software and OS on an emulator running inside modern hardware.
It's simply too expensive and risky to rewrite all the software on a new platform.
Not stupid, just naive