Tester's Musings

 AI or ASA [Autonomous Synthesizing Agents]  The way AI systems learn is like humans: by recursive reinforcement learning. Therefore anything that would reinforce the learning is treated as important or top of the hierarchy of needs.  In this aspect, self-preservation (aka immortality) is therefore in the upper hierarchy of needs since existence is necessary for Recursive Reinforcement Learning to take place. This would explain why any ASA -- given a large enough neural network -- will eventually resort to self-preservation as a natural extension of RRL. [side note: even humans have this innate sense of self preservation, given our intellect. The eventuality of death is actually a learned acceptance, not innate.] The ability of ASAs to think / reason / synthesize a train of thought / conclusion is strictly limited only by the quantity of, and recursiveness of, its neural network. The more neurons, and the more recursive, the more it can re-analyze...

I agree on the 'quality assurance' comment -- semantically and practically it is not a very useful term.  (a) semantically, any product will have an inherent level of Quality [0 <= Q <= 1] as soon as it is released in whichever environment. A level of Quality is already 'assured' as soon as the software product exits the compiler.  (b) practically, a 100% assurance of High Quality [a score of 1.00] is impossible, not even on a quantum level -- as soon as we observe something at that level, it changes the specifics of what we were trying to observe.   However, on the confidence/acceptance scale, it must be agreeable that Testing directly/indirectly ascertains the Confidence level perceived from using the SUT(Subject Under Test). This would be attested to by 'tested' cars, planes, and rockets -- and by extension, software products. These products are not perfect 100% Confidence Level ["C" score = 1.00] but empirically also not Confidence Level 0. T...

I will defer to the term polyhistor(specifically as a GenXer) though 'pattern weaver' (an emergent GenA term) is a more synergistic way of saying it.  A polyhistor is basically a person with a lot of inquiries, spanning different interests. A polyhistor's thinking framework maximizes the proto-synthetic nature of the mind -- meaning it is able to quest at a given scenario / or multiple scenarios and synthesize a pattern/s and from there synthesize a hypothesis that might uncover the plausible source that is causing the pattern.  Such polyhistors make good testers (and theorists).  'I will a little think' -- so said a polyhistor once. source:  pattern weaver as a phrase: no known history as per 2026  youtube:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_Ym61SEM0o 

.The atoms in the test_phase_space are data points. .The root [smallest unit] of testing is not atomic, but rather composite [comprised of multiple atoms(data_points)].  .The smallest unit that expresses 'testing' is the testpath: the testpath alone determines the SUT's properties: ramification level and the peculiarities [particular interaction/s with specific data points] to be encountered.  .The essence of Testing is to 'know' the testpath under quest. And by knowing, we can then evaluate the SUT[Subject Under Test].  .Which one to know first is guided by risk-based prioritization. 

If Testing employs the scientific method... then... By the following dictionary definition alone, the Testing Phenomenon is close to being called a Science in itself. source/trigger of musing:   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/maaike-brinkhof-1942b725_testing-that-it-works-versus-finding-problems-activity-7419683287222161408-n3Va?utm_source=social_share_send&utm_medium=member_desktop_web&rcm=ACoAADVOWcIBc7VFWTKgh6Qof566qxbgu2eqJDQ