From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 16 Jul 93 12:53:24 GMT From: csn!news.den.mmc.com!iplmail!jcrigler@migs.ucar.edu (Jim Crigler) Subject: Re: US Army agrees with Admiral Tuttle, for AI and not-Ada Message-ID: <1993Jul16.125324.4432@iplmail.orl.mmc.com> List-Id: Greg Aharonian (srctran@world.std.com) wrote about my comment about his use of statistics: : I don't claim my statistics that I post are accurate. I will claim : that they are the only statistics that do exist for Ada activities. : In fact someone from the Army challenge me about this particular : statistic, and my response was "Fine, show me a list of Army AI : projects in Ada". Anybody care to charge this red flag? Unless Greg is repudiated with _facts_, I think we have to believe him. [...] : My databases have it - so should these professionally run operations. I don't _think_ you meant to exclude yourself from the set {professionally run operations} ;-) : In general (or in admiral) one reason that I don't believe the DoD : really [cares] about Ada is that the DoD refuses to collect data : revealing exactly what is going on with the language inside and : outside the DoD. In the business world, such ignorance of : demographics is a sure route to bankruptcy. : I presented a ton of data at WadaS [...] ... which I was sad to have missed. : Admittedly, my data isn't the most accurate (I don't have the plush : rugs like SEI does) but it is the only data that exists, a sad : commentary on DoD support for Ada. See my response to the first exerpted paragraph. Any challenges? Jim Crigler -------------------------------------------------------------------- I can't figure out what Martin Marietta's opinion _is_, much less speak for it.