Skip to main content

Fishing for bugs.

You probably don't know, but I'm keen on fishing (Honest! Ok, maybe not, but bare with me...) I spend my free time, by the river bank or out on the sea searching for 'the big one'. The big catch that'll stand as tall as me, and feed my family for a week. My dream is to be the guy standing next to his prize-fish on that black and white picture behind the bar.

Over the years, I've become reasonably skilled. I usually find a fish or two when ever I'm out on the imaginary water. I've learned where they live, where they spawn, and of course where's best to catch them. For example, There's a little bend in the river upstream from my home, that has some great fishing spots. The overhanging rocks protect small fish from the predatory eyes of birds, and people. Of course where there's small fish, there's usually the odd big fish or two.

Ok, lets imagine that fishing had a profitable side too, and wasn't just a [fictitious] hobby. For example, People would hire me to help remove fish from their lakes. It seems that certain large predatory fish can be quite a nuisance, and land owners are often keen to get rid of them. Take last year for example, I was up in Scotland fishing for Pike on the request of a local land owner. The land owner had become nervous after hearing reports of the 6ft man eating Pike, and hoped to avoid any nasty fish related incidents on his estate.

Monday, the first day of my holiday - I set out onto the lake, in my small rib boat: "John Frum". After a hour or so I caught my first Pike. I also found a few smaller fish, but these were not really what I was looking for. But again, my experience reminded me that small fish, might mean big fish are also lurking down in the depths of the lake.

Each day I ventured out onto the lake and each day I found at least one big fish, and somedays two. By the end of the week, the land owner was pretty impressed with my exploits. He was happy that I'd found the fish, and seemed reassured that something had been done about the fish problem. I was happy in my role as 'fisherman' and it felt good to be helping people out.

But then something confusing happened, I found I was suddenly out of work. I was going to have to find another place to [make up stories about] fish for a living. The landowner had decided that he didn't need any more fishing done on the lake, and anyway he'd decided to open the lake to holiday makers the next day. I mentioned the problem with 'man eating pike' and how sometimes they didn't distinguish between who or what they were eating and how this could harm business. But to my surprise he replied "You spent all week fishing the lake, each day you caught a pike and on Thursday and Friday you caught 2 each day".

"Thats my point!" I replied, "aren't you worried?"

"How could I be worried? The fish are all gone, you found them all!"

As you can see, The land owner and I had different interpretations of the same results. I, the tester-turned-fisherman visualises a massive test space of 'lake'. A lake so vast that my puny rod and line only manage to catch fish after extensive practice and hours of work. I see my work as a sample, albeit an intelligent sample that helps find things other 'anglers' have missed. But I don't ever claim to have fished the entire lake clear. In fact the more I find, the more evidence I have of a problem, not less.

The landowner, see's the results differently. He's motivated to open to the public. A confirmation bias is helping him to interpret the results in a positive light. In his view, there are a finite number of problems, and we have removed some of those or at least we know where they live and what they are. The unknown issues, that we might expect given our sample's results, are less visible to him, because of the bias to interpret the results as desired, that is as 'good news'.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why you might need testers

I remember teaching my son to ride his bike. No, Strike that, Helping him to learn to ride his bike. It’s that way round – if we are honest – he was changing his brain so it could adapt to the mechanism and behaviour of the bike. I was just holding the bike, pushing and showering him with praise and tips.
If he fell, I didn’t and couldn’t change the way he was riding the bike. I suggested things, rubbed his sore knee and pointed out that he had just cycled more in that last attempt – than he had ever managed before - Son this is working, you’re getting it.
I had help of course, Gravity being one. When he lost balance, it hurt. Not a lot, but enough for his brain to get the feedback it needed to rewire a few neurons. If the mistakes were subtler, advice might help – try going faster – that will make the bike less wobbly. The excitement of going faster and better helped rewire a few more neurons.
When we have this sort of immediate feedback we learn quicker, we improve our game. When the f…

Thank you for finding the bug I missed.

Thank you to the colleague/customer/product owner, who found the bug I missed. That oversight, was (at least in part) my mistake. I've been thinking about what happened and what that means to me and my team.

I'm happy you told me about the issue you found, because you...

1) Opened my eyes to a situation I'd never have thought to investigate.

2) Gave me another item for my checklist of things to check in future.

3) Made me remember, that we are never done testing.

4) Are never sure if the application 'works' well enough.

5) Reminded me to explore more and build less.

6) To request that we may wish to assign more time to finding these issues.

7) Let me experience the hindsight bias, so that the edge-case now seems obvious!

Being a square keeps you from going around in circles.

After a weary few hours sorting through, re-running and manually double checking the "automated test" results, the team decide they need to "run the tests again!", that's a problem to the team. Why? because they are too slow. The 'test' runs take too long and they won't have the results until tomorrow.
How does our team intend to fix the problem? ... make the tests run faster. Maybe use a new framework, get better hardware or some other cool trick. The team get busy, update the test tools and soon find them selves in a similar position. Now of course they need to rewrite them in language X or using a new [A-Z]+DD methodology. I can't believe you are still using technology Z , Luddites!
Updating your tooling, and using a methodology appropriate to your context makes sense and should be factored into your workflow and estimates. But the above approach to solving the problem, starts with the wrong problem. As such, its not likely to find the right ans…