Meeleetester

We all have been reading headlines and articles about cars that have been recalled due to certain failures, and the numbers of cars that needs to be delivered to local car shops are always quite high. A quick Google search shows articles like BMW recalls 300.000 cars , Kia recalls 500.000 cars , Fiat recalls 4.8 million cars , this list could be as long as you want it to be. Recently Tesla's model 3 were tested by Consumer Reports , a nonprofit organization providing product ratings and reviews, and they ended up not recommending this model due to issues with Tesla's stopping distance which were almost 50 meters when braking at about 100 km/h. This was far worse than any contemporary car tested by the magazine and about 2 meters longer than the stopping distance of a Ford F-150 full-sized pickup .  Tesla, instead of recalling this model, which has more than 400.000 pre-orders (at this point I was not able to find out how many were already sent out from the factory), they p

For a long time, at least over the last decades, testers have been implicitly considered to be responsible for testing the service that is developed. After each development cycle, which lasted many weeks and months, followed a cycle of testing, which lasted for some weeks, and then the service was released to production to the end-users. If the version happened to contain any serious bugs, testers were usually "blamed" for not discovering this during the test phases. But why was this a common (mis)understanding for a long time, and perhaps still is in some companies? Why are not developers blamed for introducing the bug in the first place, product owner for not being specific enough when explaining what the end-user wanted, or was it the end-user that was unclear in his or her description of the feature? Why do we even bother pointing fingers on a specific role? At the end, the end-user or the customer is always right. If they experience an issue with the service that you c