[SystemSafety] Does "reliable" mean "safe" and or "secure" or neither?

[Martyn Thomas]

On 24/04/2016 10:48, Peter Bernard Ladkin wrote:
> First, a response to Michael (without quoting him). I accept that there is a dynamic with expressing
> views on this list which not everyone feels comfortable negotiating.

Different communities adopt different standards of conduct in scientific
negotiations. In the 1980s I observed a meeting of IFIP WG2.1 that was
discussing new formal languages ("abstracto") for solving a set of
problems that Dijksra had proposed as test cases. A few presenters tried
arm-waving rather than mathematics and were heckled with "where's the
formality?" repeatedly. One was unable to finish his presentation (which
was, in my opinion, a good thing as he was wasting everyone's time).
This was robust scientific debate amongst a group of experts with
international reputations. I was impressed with the progress that was made.

The following year I was on the steering committee for a workshop in
California on the subject of process modelling. The SC agreed to adopt
the WG2.1 style of meeting (because the process modelling community had
a lot of arm-wavers and needed greater rigour). I was asked to explain
this mode of working at the start of the workshop. It was not well
received. Indeed, I received no invitations to further meetings of the
process modelling community for several years. Robust disagreement was
viewed as unacceptably offensive in that academic community at that time
and place.

Different communities have different views on when robust disagreement
becomes offensive. I would be sorry if we stopped having robust
disagreements here because, often, I find the posts from people whose
opinions differ from mine very illuminating once they have been provoked
into explaining their reasons for those opinions. Please keep provoking.

And if you are reading this list but not contributing because you fear
robust disagreement then please overcome your fears. We are all often
wrong in our opinions and the quickest way to test the soundness of your
views is to expose them to criticism by others. (I argued with Bev
Littlewood, for years, but I have learnt the error of my ways). No one
should feel humilated by being shown to be wrong. It's how we make
progress, individually and as a profession, even if it feels painful for
a moment or two.

Martyn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20160424/ca4881f1/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 560 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20160424/ca4881f1/attachment.pgp>