I think that the "OSI" he's speaking about isn't an engineering tool, a thing people would
use to
construct systems; rather, this "OSI" is a way of
modelling systems that
exist — systems that, of course, were not implemented by people thinking about OSI. It's an
analytical modelling tool, a thing applied to a system retrospectively in an attempt to understand it, break it down along abstract rather than concrete lines. Like the various flavors of literary criticism.
Except in the case of OSI, it's not a reputable analytical tool from the perspective of actual academics; it's rather a discredited one. Instead, it's only lay-people with an outdated view of the state-of-scientific-practice who attempt to apply the discredited tool. And this article is an attempt to get those lay-people to stop doing that.
Compare/contrast how the layman may often think that Freudian psychoanalysis is still in use in psychiatry — and may even try to apply it themselves to understand someone's motivations. Much to the chagrin of psychiatrists.
Except in the case of OSI, it's not a reputable analytical tool from the perspective of actual academics; it's rather a discredited one. Instead, it's only lay-people with an outdated view of the state-of-scientific-practice who attempt to apply the discredited tool. And this article is an attempt to get those lay-people to stop doing that.
Compare/contrast how the layman may often think that Freudian psychoanalysis is still in use in psychiatry — and may even try to apply it themselves to understand someone's motivations. Much to the chagrin of psychiatrists.