Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: "Xml-Dev" <email@example.com>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Managing Innovation
- From: "Barton Stanley" <Barton.Stanley@innovision.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 13:45:11 -0500
- Importance: Normal
- In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9ED06@hq1.pcmail.ingr.com>
> Can an innovative environment produce a trusted computing system?
I am intrigued by the original question for this thread. As I started
to read the cited article, I was reminded of an aphorism that has been
with me lo these many years:
"It took creativity to get the first airplane off the ground and it
takes engineering to keep any airplane in the air."
(Unfortunately, I do not have an attribution for this. I'd appreciate
any substantive leads on finding one, though.)
Midway through the article I was a bit peeved and my response to the
If by "innovative environment" you mean an environment in which
creativity and improvisation reign, then I say the answer is "no".
If you mean one in which engineering and all the latest technology
are king, then I again say, "no". If however you mean an environment
in which thinking, feeling human beings somehow manage to find an
effective balance between these two, then I say the answer is
a resounding "yes".
By the end of the article, I decided that I was in violent agreement
with the author. Instead of "creativity" he uses the term "artful
making" and instead of "engineering" he uses the term "industrial
"It's important to recognize that artful and industrial making are
not mutually exclusive. Artful making doesn't replace industrial
making. Artful making should not be applied everywhere, nor should
industrial making. They complement each other and often can be used in
combination. Complementary doesn't mean interchangeable, though. As
opportunities for artful making multiply with the expansion of the
knowledge work sector of business, managers and other workers must be
careful not to attempt to solve artistic problems with industrial
methods, and vice versa."
I still prefer the aphorism as a way of expressing this, though. :)
> In short, the market demands innovation AND security. Can we
> 'do the simplest thing that will possibly work' and still produce
> a secure system.
I am puzzled by this. To me, the definition of something that will
"work" is something that fulfills all the necessary requirements.
So, if the "simplest thing that will possibly work" fulfills all
the necessary requirements of a secure system, then the answer must
of course be "yes". Am I missing something?