[trustable-software] Exploring the "Hypothesis for software to be trustable"

trustable at panic.fluff.org trustable at panic.fluff.org
Wed Jan 3 11:20:22 GMT 2018

On Wed, 3 Jan 2018, Paul Sherwood wrote:

> Edmund - so far I haven't concluded that we need to be able to measure 
> everything. If you believe that we *do* need to measure something like this, 
> can you justify why?
> br
> Paul
   So I believe that without the ability to measure we are unable evaluate 
change and so we cannot assess risk or uncertainty.

To quote a conversation elsewhere discussing the following volume

" 1. Management cares about measurements because measurements inform
      uncertain decisions.

   2. For any decision or set of decisions, there are a large combination
      of things to measure and ways to measure them but perfect certainty
      is rarely a realistic option.

  3. Therefore, management needs a method to analyze options for reducing
     uncertainty about decisions. "

I'd make the point that though designing experiments which allow us to 
measure things can sometimes be complex, without being able to do this we 
are unable to confirm our findings and verify that the cause of aberrant 
behaviour in the systems or the construction of the systems.

More information about the trustable-software mailing list