I met someone a couple years ago who was a U2 pilot (which are still in active service). He'd flown F-16s until he reached the point in the promotion ladder where flying stopped, then switched to U2s to keep being a pilot. After hitting 20 years, he was taking his retirement and training to fly Grumman S-2Ts with CAL FIRE.
Very down-to-earth guy who knew what he wanted and made his choices. Didn't at all seem like the sort to find edge-of-the-atmosphere flying a mystical experience.
1. define a requirement
2. implement the requirement
3. verify that the requirement was implemented
TDD was built around the idea that 1 and 3 could be unified in automated testing, and that's certainly true for a large part of it. But QA as a discrete role needs to exist because, beyond verifying that 2 was done correctly, they expose higher level bugs in 1, the requirements themselves.
It's virtually impossible to define requirements completely and without second order interactions that cause problems. QA is as effective at exposing assumptions and handwaving by the people who created the wireframes or the visual design as by the developers failing to test their own work.
And ideally, this leads to the cycle being virtuous: higher quality starts at the requirements phase, not the implentation phase. It's not just that QA should work closely with the engineers--the engineers need to work closely with UX and VD to ensure they fully understand the requirements. The incentives are aligned among all parties.
Imagine the poor post-doc in the back of the truck, no seatbelt, watching and noting anything going on, while the driver is doing donuts in a parking lot to really stress-test the magnetic containment.
In WW2, was there an existing organisation for a coordinated response? In the Korean War? Was NATO the organization that coordinated allies in the Persian Gulf War?
Of course military alliances can be formed after wars start, I'm not saying this couldn't happen in Europe. But it's different to have a military alliance existing responding to a conflict (or better yet preventing the conflict, as the military alliance served as a deterrent).
In those countries (i.e., middle eastern countries) power and wealth is usually more connected to gov't and the military rather than independent industries. If you are a nepo-baby, your opportunities will tend to be more gov't/military than celebrity or corporate.
Not to mention that the world is very widely designed to be manipulated by hands: doorknobs, handles, container sizes. A unique door opening appendage isn't going to do much good around your house.
Same here. It's a fading memory, but the decade following 9/11 really did feature a lot of big brains turning THE COMING CALIPHATE into an existential threat to humanity. Which seems quaint, now.
Ukraine has an 800k+ man army, and has rejected expansion of conscription to those under 27. They literally have everyone under 27 left to conscript. They're not facing a manpower shortage. That's Russian propaganda.
No one is insisting on Ukraine in NATO. NATO has been continually refusing, officially and unofficially, membership for Ukraine because it's actively involved in a war. The NATO charter automatically rejects membership for any party actively engaged in hostilities, defensively or otherwise. Ukraine will never be in NATO unless it has an actual peace with Russia. Talk of Ukraine joining NATO is, again, Russian disinformation trying to blame NATO expansion for Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Very down-to-earth guy who knew what he wanted and made his choices. Didn't at all seem like the sort to find edge-of-the-atmosphere flying a mystical experience.
reply