Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: Why (IMO) you should vote Yes to Motion 14.02



> Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:16:42 -0500
> From: Ralph Baker Kearfott <rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Nate Hayes <nh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: "Corliss, George" <george.corliss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>  P1788 <stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>  John Pryce <j.d.pryce@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Why (IMO) you should vote Yes to Motion 14.02
> 
> On 6/27/2010 17:02, Nate Hayes wrote:
> > George Corliss wrote:
> >> My extrapolation of Nate's argument below sounds just a little bit like
> >> Bill Walster's, "Containment is REQUIRED; all else are quality of
> >> implementation issues." Or simply, "Thou shalt not lie."
> >>
> >> A standard requiring (almost) only containment would allow InfSup and
> >> MidRad, its exception-handling could be quite simple (but not trivial),
> >> and there probably would be (shudder) NO common underlying levels or
> >> theory.
> >>
> >> Would that be any "standard" at all?
> >
> > I don't agree there would be no underlying levels or theory, but otherwise,
> > yes, I think what you describe actually sounds pretty good! :-)
> >
> > On the counter to your argument, though, I don't expect anyone will stop
> > using fast matrix multiply in Intlab just because 1788 (apparently) is
> > going
> > to decree the software is non-conforming. However, the question
> > lingering in
> > my mind then becomes: has P1788 really accomplished anything relevant
> > except
> > creating a bunch of rules no one likes to follow?
> >
> 
> Hmmm ... That seems to lead us to the questions:
> "What is a standard, anyway?" and "Why do we want a standard
> or why is it important to have a standard?" and "What do we
> wish to accomplish with a standard?"
> 
> Baker
> 

	Excellent!

	Yes, those are EXACTLY the questions before us.

	Any standard vague enough to admit almost anything as
	conforming is not a standard at all.  At the risk of
	offending someone out there, I point to LIA, in which
	an arithmetic that does not have 1 + 1 = 2 could be
	admitted as conforming.

	Most of you are probably not old enough to know what
	life was like before 754.  It was not pretty.  Things
	like 18/3 != 6.  I still have nightmares. :-)

	Any standard specific enough to be useful will also
	have many arbitrary rules within it.  After all, if it
	were true that one way is obviously better than another
	everyone would be doing that & a standard would not be
	necessary.

	If I do all the arbitrary things one way & you do them
	another, we may both get good results but we will not
	be able to compare them.

	And since these decisions ARE arbitrary, doing them
	differently has no value.  Of all the ways we could do
	things, doing them the same is what makes us into a
	community.

	A standard is no more or less arbitrary than deciding
	which side of the road to drive on.  So long as we
	confine ourselves to different roads, it doesn't matter.
	It only matters if we want to visit each other & then
	it becomes a matter of life & death.  Literally.

	There will be many rules you do not like to follow.  You
	have to believe that following them is more important
	for the community as a whole than expressing your
	individuality by being ruggedly independent.

	Hermits don't need standards.  Only social creatures do.
	If you don't believe that, you are hurting this effort
	more than helping it.

	And what will we accomplish by having an arbitrary
	standard?

	A standard is a new language.  It will give us ways of
	understanding each other than we lack without it.

	A standard is like money.  If you don't believe it in
	its nothing more than pieces of paper with funny
	pictures.  You are enriched by believing in it.

	A standard is a social contract.  We agree to conform
	to it to be a member of a community larger than
	ourselves.

	And, believe it or not, we are more enriched by that
	community than by stubbornly going our own way on
	arbitrary things just to be different.

	Woa!  Where did all THAT come from?  Must be something
	in the water around here.  I'll have to watch that in
	the future. :-)

	After all, you can't criticise everyone & still be a
	member of the community.  You have to compromise.
	Even if the compromise means nothing more than getting
	along. :-)

	Take care when you go to the town well.  The water may
	be a bit iffy here. :-)

	Yours,

				Dan