I want to find out if a QA manager or Engineering manager actually knows how AI can be useful for testing and and when it is not VS just brute forcing AI into every workflow and putting too much trust in AI. I guess the latter behavior can be called “AI pilled”. It is annoying and detrimental.
What are the signs that a QA manager or Engineering manager is AI pilled?
It is annoying.
The telltale sign for me is the person assumes that AI has the expertise or understands the intent. AI can help automate things but in order to do that, someone needs to understand the problem space well. If not, all you’ll get is shallow automation.
It does remind me a bit when many managers thought they could brute force automaton into testing flows that were dependent on real time active critical analysis.
What happened in that case was that they failed to do so but often succeed in eliminating a core highly valuable part of testing and because they did not understand it, they never knew what they had lost.
That pattern could very well happen again, just with a broader impact.
A lack of critical thinking and analysis being applied to their embracement of AI carries a strong sense of irony as that is one of the exact things they risk losing on their journey.
When they use the word AI as a solution to every problem.
What is their AI bill like? That’s my question, if it’s enough to hire more engineers, then sure, they are on the pill
Per conversations, like maybe $200-1000 per month for QA depending on usage. $500-2000 per month per Dev. So, they are surely not AI pilled by that standard.