|
omg - all this pseudo-scientifc bullshit was just easily ignored in the past. Nowadays every second day I have to explain someone, who knows about my scientific interests, why free energy, Globuli, and Quantum-XY don't work.
Let alone all these "I know it better" YouTube and social-media trolls with it's conspiracy theories...
I sometimes speculate what good could be done with all these "thinking-enery" of all "alternative explaination" followers and producers...
People like to think and find out new and alternative solutions and theories, the bad thing is: the bar is high - if you want to "produce" new knowledge - you have to learn alot about the existing one! So people want to shortcut - find simple answers - and the "alternative pseudo-science" provides them.
What really worries me, this kind of thinking arrived politics...
|
|
|
|
|
...sometimes.
Don't Hit Save - Typos[^]
So, you wanna release without testing now? 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
End user testing is also testing. Jussaying! 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
Releasing without a formal test period is SOP at my place! 
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
We don't need no stinking tests? Ship it! Customers are way better at finding bugs than developers.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
It is bad but it is true. One can do tests and tests and ... in dev env but the real test - which shows the real mistakes- is going live. It is like it is,unfortunately 
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
IMO it is up to the developer to test his code and make sure it is good to go.
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently that's what our CIO believes too. But I disagree because testing your own code is like trying to proofread your own manuscript. You can't do it because you've been looking at it too long.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on how honest you are with yourself, and how seriously you take your job, but yes, there is a tendency to overlook some key aspects because you are so close to the product.
|
|
|
|
|
Nah. Trust but verify. IMHO, it always good to have someone else other that the developer themselves to verify/test the changes before promoting it to production. It could be time consuming to go through the process but it worthy.
Bryian Tan
|
|
|
|
|
Well, IMO I test my code far more, and better than QA ever does.
1) I am very close to the requirements, in fact I usually define them, and I know exactly how it has to function.
2) I know what I am doing, QA are usually a bunch of fools.
3) I am savagely honest with myself.
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes, a developer might not see their own mistake until someone challenge them. They do make mistake once in a while and omit details that they think is not important. Sometimes those good QA folks are the one who caught it.
Bryian Tan
|
|
|
|
|
> Sometimes, a developer might not see their own mistake until someone challenge them.
'A developer might', QA wont, they are normally idiots in my experience, and I mean that seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
Depends - you get idiots in QA, yes. But you also get idiots in development, we've all had to work with them; they hang out on QA here and ask the same sh*t over, and over again ...
But if you respect QA - and QA people respect you - then they can be worth their weight in gold. Good QA is hard work: it's about testing the stuff that you as a developer didn't think of without any idea of how the code works, and getting problems fixed before they get expensive.
Yes, developers should test their code - but that shouldn't be the only testing because it's too easy to make assumptions about how software "should" be used. And when it meets the user, you can bet they will do it another way entirely!
Bad QA, unsupported QA, ignored QA: that can sink a company, I've seen it happen.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
modified 5-Mar-17 8:46am.
|
|
|
|
|
At least that is how it should be, however they are generally incompetent in my experience.
I have actually had to fly over to the US to resolve a supposed BSOD issue in one of my drivers to find that one of the test PCs was not suitable for windows 7, many of the system drivers were missing and the Dell update tool refused to do so.
The second PC was some kind of rack mounted one that slid into a case and engaged in a back plane connector. It wasnt engaging properly and crashed without my driver actually running.
And QA couldnt determine this for themselves?
Bloody idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But not as catchy or fun as this!  (I'm not a supporter of the guy, but enjoy the beat, so non-soapbox for that reason!)
Sudden Sun Death Syndrome (SSDS) is a very real concern which we should be raising awareness of. 156 billion suns die every year before they're just 1 billion years old.
While the military are doing their part, it simply isn't enough to make the amount of nukes needed to save those poor stars. - TWI2T3D (Reddit)
|
|
|
|
|
David O'Neil wrote: But not as catchy or fun as this!
Or this
|
|
|
|
|
|
I had forgotten about The Glitch Mob! The last I heard of them was Drink The Sea. I checked out Love Death Immortality and rest assured this goes into my playlist 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a simple man, I see Daft Punk I upvote
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you like them, give Lindsey Stirling or the Piano Guys a try.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Upvoting for Lindsay Stirling. She has really nice hair.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
