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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public Path: controlnews3.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!tar-meneldur.cbb-automation.DE!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A. Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language) Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 15:31:26 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: tar-meneldur.cbb-automation.de (212.79.194.119) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1083590230 19466814 I 212.79.194.119 ([77047]) X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 Xref: controlnews3.google.com comp.lang.ada:207 Date: 2004-05-03T15:31:26+02:00 List-Id: On Mon, 3 May 2004 12:06:40 +0000 (UTC), Georg Bauhaus wrote: >Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: >: On Sat, 1 May 2004 06:38:08 +0400 (MSD), "Alexander E. Kopilovich" >: wrote: > >: Engineering is a product of science. Without science it is called >: craftsmanship. > >You are free to make this distinction, and I am free to call it stuck-up. I do not want to undermine engineering. >:>So your understanding of democracy implies that any substantial influence, >:>even in complex scientific/technical matters, can be performed only by bodies, >:>of which general public is well aware through mass-media? >: >: Absolutely. To be prepared for concessions (science is an expensive >: thing) public has to be aware of what's going on. > >That's funny. There are some very illuminating books about >who is helping whom to get this or that on the way, including >scientific endeavors that might never be accepted by the general >public. Ah, here we return to the starting point. Something is badly wrong with how we are dealing with creators. >What makes you think that a lobby cannot be supportive in science, >only everywhere else? It can, but why should everything depend on lobbying? More generally, why everytime and everywhere "technical issues are irrelewant". Even more general: are we damned or just stupid? >: The difference is that next time, other firm would pay more attention >: to quality. > >Good joke ;-) >In general, a big company will be offered new contracts no matter >how high the percentage of failed projects is, so malfunctioning >software is just one of the factors that might influence future >negotiations and choices of contractors. Right, if solely money involved. This is why I said that the state should intervene and tune the game rules. -- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de