alt Hacker News> given its propensity to just make shit up and cheat
That's more-or-less how I define QA work. The goal is not proving overall correctness, it's surfacing individual issues.
> given its propensity to just make shit up and cheat
That's more-or-less how I define QA work. The goal is not proving overall correctness, it's surfacing individual issues.
I think you could use AI for this if you do it properly as a sort of adversarial coding project. Have it build tests to break the code. Don't give it the job of making a test suite that passes.
I think people higher up are warning against a naive mistake, which is asking one agent to write both the product and the test suite. Here, making things up and cheating becomes a problem of quality theater...