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: 2004-04-10 03:48:41 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!dialin-145-254-036-234.arcor-ip.NET!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: No call for Ada Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 12:48:24 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <20040409115529.8C0D24C412B@lovelace.ada-france.org> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-145-254-036-234.arcor-ip.net (145.254.36.234) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1081594120 94936458 I 145.254.36.234 ([77047]) User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6940 Date: 2004-04-10T12:48:24+02:00 List-Id: Andrew Carroll wrote: > From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" > Subject: Re: No call for Ada > [snip] >> In my view, nothing will change until governments (US, I do not believe >> in EU) understand that the current state of software development is a >> real threat, in a long term perspective, maybe, greater than terrorism. >> > I'm not sure if your saying that governments need to verify all software > that goes to market, sort of like the FDA approves medications There are different ways. Don't you agree that the software which fault may lead to loss of human life shall be approved? For the rest it would be enough to require some level of liability for commercial software depending on its price and application area. > or > if your saying that the US companies are predominantly responsible > for the majority of bad software and it's the US governments fault. The government should have cared to keep OS diversity. It should have invested in key software development areas such as languages, OS, networking, graphics. Ada exists only because it was sponsored. > Either way I agree that ALL software from EVERY country could > be writen better. I disagree that it should be "approved" by some > government entity. Imagine how much a copy of Windows would > cost then!! Imagine that a new Windows version will be bought once per decade? But see above, there is no need to approve Windows used at home. > Not only that but who approves the methods of approval? It is much lesser problem. It is not rocket science to see what Windows is. > What > your saying is like saying that the industry needs an unpenetrable > network firewall. To your surprise, there is one! Disconnect your > network from the Internet and then, your network is unpenetrable > from the Internet. See how easy that was? Consider that recent attempts to introduce an internet-based voting system. Sooner or later it will come. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de