This week we were tasked with reading and reviewing chapter 1 and the introductions of chapters 2-6 of our book, Apprenticeship Patterns.
Chapter 1: This was a great introduction to a book. I am not a person who usually reads books because I usually find them boring, but I have to say that this introduction has really grabbed my attention. The parts that really stuck out to me was the very first paragraph, and Dave’s Story. I loved the first paragraph because it says that the book is for people who “have had a taste of developing and want to take it further.” This is an important quote because that includes me and every CS student at Worcester State. This capstone project is some student’s first taste of real development. I really liked Dave’s story too because it reminded me of myself, I have had trouble with software development in my time here at Worcester State, but through my classes, I have developed confidence in my abilities, and learned a lot. The description of apprenticeship also reminds me of my internship because that is what I am doing there. I am basically learning from my master by doing small projects that give me experience.
Chapter 2: I felt that this chapter was more irrelevant because most of us have already passed the step of choosing our first language. By first language, I mean choosing one that we will become fluent in. I have chosen Java as mine because that is what I have learned the most about, and it is the primary language that my job uses as well. However, this chapter did show me that you don’t have to be proficient in multiple languages, but you should master one of them. I also really enjoyed the connection between apprenticeship and the “Tasting a New Cup of Tea” story. It has a really deep meaning of getting rid of bad things, and learning new and better things. I will also be using that empty java class technique for when I need to test unknown features.
Chapter 3: I felt as though this chapter was a direct attack on me. Honestly, I am one of those people that is in this field for the money, and I will probably be taking the job that offers me the highest amount of money. However, after reading through this I will be thinking about learning more about the long road as it could help me enjoy what I do and make a lot of money along the way.
Chapter 4: This chapter was great. I love the “Be the Worst” mentality because I do think like this, but unlike these other people. I haven’t been using that to better myself. I always just assumed I wouldn’t be as good as them, but I should be using that as a way to learn more so I can become as good or better than them.
Chapter 5: This chapter was less interesting to me because it told me stuff that I already know. I know that I need to expand my horizons when it comes to software development. Another reason I disliked this part was because it told me to do a lot of reading, and as I mentioned before I do not like reading. I’m going to use this section as my chapter 6 review too because they both have to do with reading. Chapter 6 was irrelevant to me because I don’t have an extensive reading list nor plan on having one.
For this first (technically second) post of this semester, I decided to talk about the FOSSisms section of the LibreFoodPantry main page. This sections was located under the about section. This sections leads off with a short introduction about what FOSSisms are and it was very useful considering I have never seen the word used before. To put it simply, FOSSisms are maxims that Heidi Ellis developed from, open source culture. I won’t talk about all 16 of them because I would be here all day, but I will talk about some of my favorites. I really enjoyed the productively lost section because it explains that the students should get lost, but that they should use this sense of confusion to learn more about what they are confused about. The last section, I’ll talk about is avoiding uncommunicated work. This section was interesting because it basically says that all work should be communicated with other members of the group, and I think that is extremely important for this project that we are about to take on.
Hello again everyone, I know it has only been a month, but I am back to writing posts bi-weekly for my software development capstone. In this blog, I will be mainly discussing topics covered from the book for CS-448. This is my last semester at Worcester State University, and I’m looking forward to writing more blogs for all of you.
For what may possibly be my last ever blog post on this blog, I found an article that discusses the possibility of Ultra-efficient computers using Atomic scale manufacturing. That sentence alone is enough to grab anyone’s attention (It certainly got mine.) After reading the introduction, I discovered that this article is about saving the environment rather than just having really fast computers. However, that’s still great because something needs to be done about the environment and this could be it. The article states that today’s computers require enough power to release more than 1 gigatonne of carbon emissions per year. That is actually really bad. ACS Nano has a solution though. They are making computers that store more data, and use less power. You would think that this wouldn’t be possible without some kind of trade off, but they figured it out.
The attained this by manipulating singular atoms in order to produce “ultra dense memory arrays” which can store way more data in a smaller space. They have ran into an issue where bottleneck is apparent, so they are still trying to find a way to make this process more efficient. In order to conduct this process, scientists must use a technique called hydrogen lithography. This is a process in which they remove certain hydrogen atoms from a silicon surface in order to write more data. They demonstrated this technique on a 24-bit memory array, and the result was a 1000 times faster fabrication of atomic computers. This means that “real world” manufacturing can begin. According to ACS, this method would consume 100 times less power, making it a huge step in the right direction towards a cleaner Earth.
It was a pleasure reading this article considering it was very short and it had a lot of interesting information on it. I didn’t expect so many chemistry topics to be involved, but I love chemistry so that is okay. This will probably be my last blog post ever, so to my readers, you have been a great audience. Thank you.
Alright everyone, I decided that for this week, I am going to move away from a QA article and talk about a general CS article. To be more specific, this article was about robots, and how even the words that they say can affect us humans. On first glance of the article, I read the title wrong and thought that humans were just bullying robots and seeing their reaction, but it is the opposite, robots are bullying humans.
The study conducted recently is a study about how human performance is affected by discouraging or encouraging words coming from a robot. They used a video game and the robot would comment on how the player was doing. It turns out that the robot saying mean things to the player about his performance caused the player to actually score lower than that of a player who was praised. As someone who dabbles in video games, I understand that people will talk about my bad skill, and I do believe that it makes players worse at what they are playing, but I didn’t think the words of a robot could have such an effect.
The test was conducted by Aaron M. Roth on about 40 participants. This test was important because most tests take a look at how humans and robots can cooperate, but this test looks at how they are when they are uncooperative. This isn’t tested as much so I fell that it is important to test this because as AI continues to develop and get better, we may see ourselves in a situation where a robot can become uncooperative. This study was done just to show that while human words definitely affect human performance, the words of a robot who is programmed to say such things can also be detrimental to us humans. We really are a weak race if I’m being honest.
I really enjoyed reading this article. The reason I chose to write this article over another QA article is that there are more ideas to write about in general CS where as QA articles are almost all the same. It is usually about the trends of 2019 or 2020. This was the first article I saw in the CS articles, and it was about robots bullying humans. This was really easy to read, and it was even easier to write about. My next blog is my last blog for the semester I believe, so hopefully there will be a great article for me to write about next week.
Hello again everyone and welcome to my fourth entry for the semester on this blog. today we are going to talk about some software testing trends. As the title of this post suggests, we will be talking about ten of them today. The article was written by Ulf Eriksson (Really cool name) and i started this article by skimming and it seems to be very short and concise, which means it’ll be easier for me to write about. I will only be writing about the five i found the most interesting.
So obviously, this article is going to be about trends that everyone should be seeing in 2019. Ulf leads off with mentioning the “evolution of new testing approaches” (Eriksson) due to new developments with Agile and DevOps. He then begins his list with discussing Agile. He says that Agile is being used in more and more comapanies. He then talks about what Agile is and how it works, but if you’re reading this you probably know what agile is so I won’t bore you with that. The next part caught my eye because it has to do with machine testing. I don’t know much about machine testing, but it still has my interest. Ulf describes how it is used as follows: Test suite optimization (redundancy), predictive analytics(key parameters), log analytics(automatic executing), traceability (test coverage), and defect analytics(identifying high risk areas). The next trend is the adoption of DevOps. This part was very short and it talks about continuous integration and continuous delivery. Another trend was shortening the delivery cycle. This section talks about how new technologies are being used in order to speed up the deliveries. This is interesting because this will always be a trend. New technologies are coming out everyday, so it is impossible for this trend to die down. Ulf also discusses big data testing as a trend, and I chose to write about this because it isn’t my concentration so it is interesting to read about this considering I am not studying it. Basically this kind of testing makes sure the large amounts of data are being verified correctly. In other words, this tests the quantity and quality of data.
I would have loved to write about every trend on this list, but this blog would be way too long and I would lose all my reader(s) about halfway through. However, Ulf Eriksson did a great job with this article. He didn’t go into much detail about every trend because some of them should have already been known. However, the lesser know trends were explained very well. This article was a very interesting read because I’m in quality assurance testing now, and it is nice seeing topics I learned in class in articles. I would recommend this to any testers out there.
Hello again everyone. For my second blog of the semester (Technically third because of intro post) I am using another article by Lanier Norville. Last week, I wrote about her article on testers becoming agents of change. This week, however, I am going to be writing about some Tricentis qTest Case Studies. I picked this article because it talks about Agile Transformation, and I am personally fond of agile frameworks.
Once again Norville leads off with a nice and small yet appropriate introduction on what she is discussing. In this case, she is talking about how companies are transforming agile and DevOps. She uses her case studies to show the “critical role” (Norville) of testers.
The first case study involves a payment processing technology provider. The VP of Test Engineering, Nick Jones attended an event on DevOps and he decided that his organization needed to transform as well. Norville then discusses how payment options have an effect on whether customers end up buying something or not. Jones developed a DevOps roadmap with his team and according to Norville they have reduced the time of delivery from “14 hours to 4 minute” (Norville) This is interesting because it is a huge drop in time which is huge for a company that is constantly making deliveries.
The next study isn’t as much of a success story as the last study, however it still seems like it is helpful. The University of the West of England switched to Tricentis qTest before using an agile framework. The head of testing, Heather Daniels that she “needed to implement a test management tool” (Norville) She needed to do this in order to maintain everything that the school used. (Library systems, eLearning systems, etc.) As of now, according to Norville, two of the organizations have switched to agile. It is a big change according to Daniels, and the University still isn’t used to making small functional deliveries, but it seems like they are getting the hang of it. I like that they switched because now they are “prioritizing the things that are most important to users first.” (Norville)
This article, in my opinion, was a little bit more difficult for me to follow, but it was still a very well written article overall. I did like how well she described each of the scenarios and what was done with qTest to transform into an agile framework. It is obvious that the article is supporting the websites own product, but that is what companies are supposed to do. Overall, this was a good read, but for my next blog, I will probably be visiting another website.
New Tricentis qTest Case Studies Highlight Testing’s Critical Role in Agile Transformation