Mon, 4 Nov 1996 08:57:05 EST
So where does the process go now?? One message implied that Congress must
accept and approve this report. Is this true?
I've always had some serious concerns whenever a committee formulates a
policy behind closed doors. I thought that public hearings and 'sunshine'
laws were becoming the more accepted practices. When were the 'public'
hearings for this report conducted?
Actually, this couldn't come at a better time. Call the campaign office of
your Congressional candidates and voice your opinion if you have one. Let
them know what you think of closed door policy sessions which affect your tax
dollars and how they are spent.
Another thought might be to have SigAda stop spending money on a conference
devoted solely to Ada. It's like preaching to the choir. Maybe, in light of
this policy, it would be better to increase Ada's visibility in the
commercial market by sponsoring more booths and perhaps even sponsoring
authors at other conferences.
Another thought: Where do simulation and training systems fall in the NRC
report? Obviously, if the simulator is based on an Ada-based warfighting
weapon, the greatest reuse would be achieved by using some of the weapon's
software in the simulator, right? But simulators usually require large
databases developed using COTS products as well as commercial image
generators. Thus, the argument can be made that the simulator should be
programmed in the COTS languages. The contractor may even get some commercial
video gaming reuse out of doing it this way. Now, the problem is: does the
simulator software behave in exactly the same way as the weapon's software?
Are we now doing 'negative training'?
Just a few of my own thoughts. These opinions are my own and do not represent
an official opinion or policy.