investigating software

Do you know what a fall guy is? the answer is you. Why? Because when you're told that there is a human in the loop means... there is a you shaped person to blame. So, while you are working harder than ever, using the latest tools money can buy or tokens can build - someone has decided that you are responsible for all the downstream failures. It's as if shipping more, responding to customer feedback, product owner judgement calls, SRE reports from production at an ever increasing rate is not enough - they want you to review it all, and be confident (as the engineer/manager in the loop) that its "all good".  If it isn't good, then you will likely be the human in the noose . The Fall Guy, A classic 1980s TV show:  IMDB Any discussion on how much we should delegate to AI tools degenerates to this well-meaning and slightly nervous statement: we should keep a human in the loop. We are trained Apes, yet we are meant to hang around waiting to be blamed. The orthodox posit...

Alan J. Portis once quipped that: "the best book on programming for the layman is Alice in Wonderland, but that's because it's the best book on anything for the layman". In the same theme, I'd like to suggest an addition to your library, the best non-technical book on AI Agents for the layman is "Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus" by Mary Shelley. Why? Because it brings home the key facts about autonomous agent aspects like quality, autonomy & speed (I can see what you’re thing, i.e.: pick any two). The book, unlike the ubiquitous screen adaptations and sequels, digs deep into the motivations & feelings of responsibility on Dr Frankenstein, the Monster's creator. It’s clear Mary Shelly had an inkling of the sort of mayhem a spirited agent could get up to, and the anguish that would cause. The parallels with modern software development and AI engineering are uncanny. For example, the doctor creates his ‘agent’ after a period of intense ...

It's August 1941, during the opening years of WW2, the axis powers had conquered much of mainland Europe -and the Allies were desperately trying to limit the capacity of the axis military industrial complex. They did this with little feedback on their success - much like some modern teams using AI tools. The Royal Air Force's (RAF) strategic bombing campaign had applied considerable resources to the task of diminishing continental targets such as occupied French ports or the factories of the Ruhr valley. Much as the northwest and northeast of England were the industrial centres of Britain, the Ruhr was where a large part of the Axis industrial might lay, and so was an important military target.  The air crews reported back after their sorties (missions), stating how successful their missions had been. If such reports were to be believed, Germany and the axis powers should be decimated, be ‘on their knees’, and would fall or at least falter in short order. Wisely the air min...

I was raised in a world full of rules, like all of us, though as I grew up in a military family in and around military bases - so maybe a bit more so for me. As a parent myself, rules are at play - "no son you can't bang our wooden table with an old hammer". Even the business world is full of rules, don't agree? Speak to your bank's payments or compliance department or your lawyer or accountant and get back to me. We soak up all sorts of rules like sponges, implicitly.  Like my toddler son when he found my old hammer, "no the rule is I can't bang the table with the hammer - when you are in the room" - while he has reverse engineered the rule and context perfectly - Though I feel he didn't pick up on the full spirit of the rule. The late author David Graeber had a talent for analysing rules in societies old and new. He used "opposites" as a way to elucidate the rules and assumptions at play in fiction and in society. A good example he us...

 Ever tried to get a teenager to do more chores around the home? For those without this joy in their lives, I’ll let you in on a secret - it goes down like a bucket of sick. You can sometimes cajole them, sometimes bribe them and even threaten them (We’ll take away your laptop!) But at best, this has mixed results. You’ll often get an uptick in throughput - the rubbish & recycling will exit the apartment more often. But quality will suffer, the cacophony of bins being banged, incessant grumbling and milk cartons being scattered about will lead to you questioning many of your life choices. This is often the case in life generally and software development in particular. The old adage “Faster, better, cheaper - Pick any 2” still holds true. Interestingly this isn’t always bad news for those in the business. More often it's a problem for customers, be they other teams or actual customers .  For example, if you provide the means to produce faster - more people may be buying you...

  A nervous tourist, glances back and forth between their phone and the street sign. They then rotate their phone 180 degrees, pauses, blink and frown. The lost traveller, flags a nearby ‘local’ (the passer-by has a dog on a lead.   “Excuse me…” she squeaks, “How may I get to Tower Hill?” “Well, that’ s a good one” ponders the dog walker, “You know…” “Yes?” queries the tourist hopefully. “Yeah…” A long pause ensues then, “Well I wouldn’t start from here” He states confidently. The tourist almost visibly deflates and starts looking for an exit. That’s often how we start off in software testing. Despite the flood of methodologies, tips on pairing, power of three-ing, backlog grooming, automating, refining and all the other … ings ) We often find ourselves having to figure out and therefore ‘test’ a piece of software by us ing it. And that’s good. Its powerful, and effective if done right. But, like our dog walker, we can sometimes find ourselves somewhere unfamiliar...