First, it is extremely unusual (ime it never happens!) for an entry-level developer to be hired and then placed in charge of some kind of complex high-risk project.
You're going to be the most junior and the most recent hire. You're not going to be in charge of *anything.*
There are just tons of jokes about how programming interviews are like "show on the whiteboard that the Traveling Salesman problem is at least NP Hard" and then after hire it's like "move this button 3px left."
@alanpage It's very telling that manual testing is seen as cheap.
IME this perception exists because (as I have repeatedly seen at clients) the absolute most junior people are hired as testers in order to keep costs down. Because they’re so junior they don’t contribute very much. 1/2
@alanpage 2/3 They stay junior because they have no mentorship (because mentorship is expensive).
The “5x to 15x” cost of automation proposed by the OP fits with this model: median developer pay is around $150k US. A team of five devs then costs ~$750k annually (considering TC only here)
@alanpage 3/4 Glassdoor lists “QA Analyst” roles as starting at $18k US. I’m in NYC so this is lower than I’ve ever seen. Let’s assume QA roles start around $25k, which is just enough to rent a room and live paycheck to paycheck in NYC.
The cheapest QA analyst costs 17% of a dev salary.
Interaction Resiliency (iXR) is the practice of Software QA (aka #testing) as applied to "devops" or more properly Safety-II software delivery (aka continuous delivery & continuous deployment).
I put a name to "testing in devops" or "agile testing in continuous delivery" because a) those phrases are clumsy 😀 and b) the current discourse in #testing constantly collapses back on itself as big-A Agile + CDT are conflated time-and-time-again with Safety-II + Kaizen #iXR
For instance the idea that there exists a computer activity called "checking" and what "checking" does is it validates assumptions.
There is a problem right there. Validation assumes some kind of goal-oriented behavior — telos — which computers do not on their own, have.
As covered pragmatically in the classic paper "The Ironies Of Automation" and further explored by Donna Haraway: computers on their own are not capable of "validation" because validation implies an understanding of some set of moral *values.*