NIST is not all bad

[Doug Gwyn]

In article <7552 at cs.utexas.edu> WHITE V L <vyw at stc06.ctd.ornl.gov> writes:
>The current push for the UPE and for 1003.7 may be from NIST, but it originated
>from beleagured federal government systems programmers.

There are only two relevant differences between the Federal government
and other corporate entities with respect to this issue:
	(1)  The Federal rules are relatively rigid, which precludes
	     negotiation between vendor and customer to obtain the
	     technically best solution (when a FIPS is in force).
	(2)  Closed systems are not permitted to the Federal customer
	     even when they make the most sense.
These are the product of bureaucracy, which is a perennial government
problem.  I imagine large corporations such as General Motors also have
rather inflexible rules that may in some cases run counter to their own
best interests.

So far as systems programming in a government UNIX environment goes, it
is not radically different from the situation in commercial industry.

I am (at times) a Federal government systems programmer, but I take the
long view of the industry.  Even if something would make my job a bit
easier in the short term, I don't want it if it's going to harm the
evolution of computing in the long run.  Premature or hasty standards
have just that effect.


Volume-Number: Volume 18, Number 19