What are STANAGs and how do they relate to unmanned aerial vehicles?

If we look at how drones, or UAVs, have been used over the last decade, we can see that they are devices with enormous potential that are far from being underutilized. There is growing interest in them (military, economic, infrastructure, environmental, etc.). So much so that many governments in different countries are investing huge amounts of capital in researching, developing, and improving these unmanned aerial vehicles.

This almost explosive increase in the diversity of UAVs inevitably leads to a poorer and more complex level of interoperability between different systems. Here, each developer creates UAV systems on their own, with their own idiosyncrasies and enriched points of view, making it difficult for two independent systems to communicate with each other and exchange information effectively.

“The ability to work together effectively and efficiently is the foundation of NATO’s success, giving the Alliance strength and capabilities beyond the sum of its parts. To carry out multinational operations, countries need to share a common set of standards”

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)

¿Qué son los STANAG y cómo se aplican a los vehículos aéreos no tripulados?

Si observamos el uso que se les ha dado a los drones, o UAV, en la última década, entenderemos que son unos dispositivos con un enorme potencial los cuales quedan lejos de estar desaprovechados. Cada vez son más y más fuertes los incipientes intereses (militares, económicos, de infraestrutcura, medioambiente, etc.) que los rodean. Tanto, que muchísimos gobiernos de diferentes países invierten cantidades enormes de su capital en investigar, desarrollar, y mejorar estos vehículos aéreos no tripulados.

Este aumento, casi disparado, de la diversidad de UAVs conduce inevitablemente a un peor y más complejo nivel de interoperabilidad entre diferentes sistemas. Aquí cada uno desarrolla sistemas UAV por su cuenta, con sus propias manías y bajo sus enriquecidos puntos de vista, de tal manera que cada vez se vuelve más dificil que dos sistemas independientes puedan comunicarse entre sí e intercambiar información efectivamente.

“The ability to work together effectively and efficiently is the foundation of NATO’s success, giving the Alliance strength and capabilities beyond the sum of its parts. To carry out multinational operations, countries need to share a common set of standards”

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)

Is there an actual difference between compiling and building?

Both terms are used daily in software development environments: "F***, compiling takes forever," or "Did you build after that last change?"... In reality, they're used pretty much the same way — and I’m guilty of that too. But, is it actually correct to refer to compiling and building a project as if they meant the same thing?

¿Hay alguna diferencia entre compilar y 'buildear'?

Ambos términos se usan a diario en ambientes de desarrollo de software: "J****, cuánto tarda en compilar.", "¿Has buildeado después de ese último cambio?"... Realmente, se utilizan casi del mismo modo, y yo me incluyo en esto. Pero, ¿es realmente correcto referirse indistintamente a compilar o buildear un proyecto como si significase lo mismo?