Re: [SystemSafety] Software reliability (or whatever you would prefer to call it)

From: C. Michael Holloway < >
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 07:53:07 -0400


On 3/8/15 10:03 AM, Littlewood, Bev wrote a whole lot of stuff, but I only want to comment on the following:
> But I did think Michaelís dig at academics was a bit below the belt. ...
I did not make a dig at academics. I made a true statement about my experience, using language that was perhaps a tad bit less kind than it could have been, but nevertheless accurate.

Surely no one on this list would dispute the existence of academics who "seem to be swayed by arguments of dubious cogency and evidence of questionable credibility." Just as no one on this list should dispute the same statement if "academics" were replaced by "government researchers", "practicing engineers", "certification authorities", "professional philosophers", or any other group. If everyone on the list is honest with his or herself, neither should anyone dispute the statement if "academics" is replaced by his or her own name, modified only by an explicit qualifier such as "sometimes". I certainly don't dispute it as applied to myself.

-- 
/*cMh*/

*C. Michael Holloway*, Senior Research Engineer

The words in this message are mine alone; neither blame nor credit NASA 
for them.



_______________________________________________ The System Safety Mailing List systemsafety_at_xxxxxx
Received on Mon Mar 09 2015 - 12:53:20 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Feb 17 2019 - 21:17:06 CET