I would imagine theyd try to automate QA too, akin to unit testing
You could imagine a situation where the automated QA is trusted and does its job in sets, with humans interspersed to backup the QA programs. But one of the QA checks is actually buggy and OK’s the missing weld, but the full batch of work covers it up before reaching a human for the double-check
In which case, both issues are at fault: too much reliance on the QA program, and allowing too much work to be done before it reached a human (bad double-check setup)
You could imagine a situation where the automated QA is trusted and does its job in sets, with humans interspersed to backup the QA programs. But one of the QA checks is actually buggy and OK’s the missing weld, but the full batch of work covers it up before reaching a human for the double-check
In which case, both issues are at fault: too much reliance on the QA program, and allowing too much work to be done before it reached a human (bad double-check setup)