I agree with the fact that "experts" are quite often wrong and it's too easy to be derailed by appeal to authority. On the other hand she has a point. As long

I agree with the fact that "experts" are quite often wrong and it's too easy to be derailed by appeal to authority. On the other hand she has a point. As long as the tech won't be 99.99xxxx safe, it will introduce moral hazard (she calls it "risk-homeostasis" but I don't think that kind of neologism is particularly expressive). At a meta-level, coining some new term could make someone raise an eyebrow. Perhaps she just didn't know about it.