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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-04-23 20:32:26 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!HSNX.atgi.net!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!216.196.106.144!border2.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.gbronline.com!news.gbronline.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 22:32:24 -0500 Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 22:32:38 -0500 From: Wes Groleau Reply-To: groleau+news@freeshell.org Organization: Ain't no organization here! User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Macintosh/20040208) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototypinglanguage) References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.9.86.93 X-Trace: sv3-0x1YOEpMeajeJRpHJXofbVSvlUFuwNOj1AeOI+g5Cu2Tpcm7Xizmb4SAnlZzIyR2BvqOIslpvPkKr/0!hclxsvDJtnj44D5+iZZo4xjwxLPA5w9LG66AgVP5FQ/Elw8I/k0u3472qoTretH9oCAIwRnrtCNd X-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.1 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7445 Date: 2004-04-23T22:32:38-05:00 List-Id: Preben Randhol wrote: > On 2004-04-22, Marius Amado Alves wrote: >>These scenarios are funny, but mythical. Surely the pilot in a commercial >>airliner does not move the flaps mechanically. There is nothing technically >>different in my vision of the 'right' car. > > No but an airplane is carefully maintained an expected. Think when your > neighbourghs old rusty car hits the road with corroded wire connections > and you meet him in 100 km/h. Then it doesn't matter so much if you > maintain and inspect your car every day. On top of that, consider that if driving were treated like flying, when a policeman pulled you over for a broken tail light and asked for your license, he could say, "I'm sorry, sir, but this is a Mercedes and your certification is for a Camaro. I'm afraid we'll have to write you a ticket and give you a ride home." On the other hand, in an airplane, when something goes wrong, you can't just turn on the flashers and stop. :-) However, my own objection was not that there's anything wrong with electronics and software (given _appropriate_ development and testing process) but that certain input devices are inappropriate for safety reasons. -- Wes Groleau http://groleau.freeshell.org/teaching/