Re: Ada is getting more popular!

[Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>]

On 10/31/10 8:48 AM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 22:57:15 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>
>> On 10/30/10 9:26 PM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>> On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 21:02:17 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>>>
>>>> So standards production costs money.  Who is going to pay?
>>>
>>> Who should pay for laws? Who does not mathematical theorems?
>>>
>>>> If the answer is tax payers, then who is going to decide
>>>> which standard deserves what amount of tax payers' money?
>>>
>>> Which law does deserve money? There are things, which cannot and may not be
>>> sold.
>>>
>>> There was enough money for the laws about curved cucumbers and bent
>>> bananas.
>>
>> And?
>
> Maybe there is still some money left for more useful things, like vital
> software standards?

So when selecting a subject for standardization, one criterion
is its usefulness (undefined term, so far), specifically its being
vital (to be defined).

If a subject vital (whatever this means) then it is payed for
with public money.

Who determines what is vital?  And who pays them for determining
what is vital, and why it is vital?

Lastly, who decides that the standard is so vital that everyone
needs copies of the standard for free, plus that its production
should be payed for by such-and-such?


>  BTW, publicly funded standards might become more
> exposed to critique and control. Note that this issue will touch everyone.
> New standards are coming, e.g. for the electrical devices in everyone's
> home.

Another criterion for selecting a subject for standardization,
then, is that the thing is in everyone's home.

Like light bulbs or cucumbers are in everyone's homes, maybe?
Who, then, will drive standardization of light bulbs, and who
does the financing?