From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cebec2c33ffff82 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: peter@crabby.demon.co.uk (Peter Finney) Subject: Re: AJPO is still clueless about the reality of DoD Ada rejection Date: 1996/03/28 Message-ID: <828021406.19802@crabby.demon.co.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 144670793 x-nntp-posting-host: crabby.demon.co.uk references: <314D2FA6.24D4@lfwc.lockheed.com> <314D8721.7E36@lfwc.lockheed.com> <315154FC.479B@lfwc.lockheed.com> organization: BAeSEMA Ltd reply-to: peter@crabby.demon.co.uk newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-03-28T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Ken Garlington wrote: >> Ken, you know we're both on the same side, BUT you and I both know of >> cases where more money was spent (in manhours) justifying a Ada waiver >> than would have been used if they had just done the Ada like good little >> boys and girls. [yet another anecdone published]. >I absolutely agree that there are cases where Ada policy is abused. >I also absolutely agree that there are cases where traffic laws are abused. >I'm not quite ready to say that either is useless, however. This reminds me of my years working for NATO in Naples (Italy :-)). I asked one of my (neapolitan) staff why the traffic signals were largely ignored in Naples. He replied " humans know better than robots". I then pointed out that there were one or two intersections where the lights were obeyed - reply " those are the dangerous crosssroads". When I pointed out that it seemed a bit pointless having the signals at all he said ( I paraphrase) "they are very useful in deciding who pays when there is an accident". Peter Finney Principal Consultant BAeSEMA Ltd Portchester UK