TestingGeek has learnt tremendously from these discussions, some time as a participant, and some time as an observer of the different type of problems, different types of questions and solutions offered or suggestions given by various experts. On this page, you will find interesting conversations which can give us some new insight, on the topics we think we know and understand well. If you have some interesting question or came across some interesting conversation, share with us.

Following example will give you hint on what you can expect in these pages. Happy Learning.

This example was given in response to the question that what should we do if it is not possible to test the system we are building.

There is the known story of Dr. Parnas, who refused to build a defense system software against nuclear missiles, stating that "The inability to test a strategic defense system under field conditions before we actually need it will mean that no knowledgeable person would have much faith in the system.". He was right, the developers/testers would be able to test and simulate some parts of the system, but the final system as a whole would be impossible to test until a real war was in course and you had nuclear ogives being shot at you. (You can not even test in at a desert location with test-intended- nuclear-bombs, because the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty prohibits.)

While Parnas is right about the ability to test the system, I think he kind of missed the point. IOW, a variant of Pascal's Wager applies. If somebody is going to be throwing nukes at me I would rather have a defense system up that will work with 0.0 < P < 1.0 than have no system up that will work with P = 0.0.