Tamás, you are conflating so many things that I don't know where to begin.

I think that you feel angst about the Agile community's loosey-goosey attitude about software development. I share that. You are preaching to the choir!

Here are some other thoughts in response:

1. Agile 2 is not "mine". It was created by 15 experienced people, through deep discussions that spanned many months. The process used is described here: https://agile2.net/agile-2/methodology/

2. Back to the 90s: I _partially_ agree. In the 90s I co-founded a software company that quickly grew to 200 people and was very profitable and successful. And our stuff was _engineered_. It was rock solid, at scale.

I recall the 90s. Things worked. Yes, the Agile community has had a negative impact on software reliability. The DevOps movement helped to improve on that, but the real problem is not "Agile" per se - it is that we lost the culture of "software engineering" and replaced it with a culture of "coding". I think that began with the celebration of "cowboy coders" like Shawn Fanning who created immensely popular software but had little formal training. Yet those famously successful examples of coding usually fell apart at scale and had to be rewritten. A great example of that is Dropbox. Still, the fast-moving pace might have made sense for them to grow - having to rewrite later might have been the best path.

But when building things that must work, like an aircraft flight control system, one cannot be free-wheeling. One must have comprehensive validation. Free-wheeling methods can be used during development, but one must then have careful validation.