In the same way that authors are better off having someone e...

Troy

npub104zp04wlgddf0w84tj8jul3w75e7ydcuuhsull2etste5040xm2qg285rf

hex

6a0f4b91c0e64fec375f337f7592bf401195d1636be43792c4a7808b51a0a627

nevent

nevent1qqsx5r6tj8qwvnlvxa0nxlm4j2l5qyv4693khephjtz20qyt2xs2vfcprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgs863qh6h05xk5hhr64erew0ch02vlzxuwwtcw0l4v4c9u686hnd4qtus8ay

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-04-05T18:49:18Z

↳ Reply to MayDood (npub1ghcetnluhryhynhuyj8s2pazldjm27wl40nu6dfeskvpv09twcnsneygat)

When I was a kid, my friends came over with their family to spend the day with my family. My friend had an essay that was due so I was asked to open t...

In the same way that authors are better off having someone else proof-read/edit their works, nearly every dev is the worst person to QA their code.

In the commercial world, a large part of being a QA engineer is the psychology of informing a dev that their code isn't perfect.

In the non-commercial world, many devs prefer to ignore any (or all) criticisms, aside from the program crashing, or complete failure of some basic functionality. Even then, I've seen where devs say they don't care about the user. I'm baffled why those devs publish to begin with.

Even the devs that do care about making a polished product, they often can't put themselves in the position of ignorance and lofty expectations that many users will have. In fact, most people are not good about putting themselves in someone else's shoes. A vast majority of people cannot overcome their own bias.

It really takes someone with a good imagination to create proper tests, outside of the rote panel of test cases. The best replacement to that is "the actual user", but when devs ignore a message that translates to "more work, and not really fun work", they'll tend to turn a blind eye.

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "6a0f4b91c0e64fec375f337f7592bf401195d1636be43792c4a7808b51a0a627",
  "pubkey": "7d4417d5df435a97b8f55c8f2e7e2ef533e2371ce5e1cffd595c179a3eaf36d4",
  "created_at": 1775414958,
  "tags": [
    [
      "e",
      "91dc44150d29dc98524baf3ea3769688df9fc49288f2263f106971379d380d76",
      "",
      "root"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "45f195cffcb8c9724efc248f0507a2fb65b579dfabe7cd35398598163cab7627"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "In the same way that authors are better off having someone else proof-read/edit their works, nearly every dev is the worst person to QA their code.\n\nIn the commercial world, a large part of being a QA engineer is the psychology of informing a dev that their code isn't perfect. \n\nIn the non-commercial world, many devs prefer to ignore any (or all) criticisms, aside from the program crashing, or complete failure of some basic functionality. Even then, I've seen where devs say they don't care about the user. I'm baffled why those devs publish to begin with.\n\nEven the devs that do care about making a polished product, they often can't put themselves in the position of ignorance and lofty expectations that many users will have. In fact, most people are not good about putting themselves in someone else's shoes. A vast majority of people cannot overcome their own bias.\n\nIt really takes someone with a good imagination to create proper tests, outside of the rote panel of test cases. The best replacement to that is \"the actual user\", but when devs ignore a message that translates to \"more work, and not really fun work\", they'll tend to turn a blind eye.\n\n",
  "sig": "e79ac0cdb1d89e55694200dc1f6f3d6b71b4ea527070ec33de2ed90a84560fe452910964b616c1a6cd6adcac88becd023ec23e9b1262175c4333805eae767bb3"
}