There’s tons of noise about ai-powered testing but separating real capabilities from hype is tough, like traditional automation requires writing and maintaining test cases while ai promises automatic generation that adapts to changes. In reality most tools are glorified script generators that don’t understand business logic or edge cases, just pattern matching rather than reasoning about what could go wrong. Tools claiming autonomous testing have poor signal to noise ratios finding trivial stuff and missing critical issues, plus they don’t fit into existing ci/cd workflows which adds complexity. I’m skeptical about replacing human qa entirely since testing requires understanding user intent and business context which ai isn’t good at yet, though there’s probably legitimate use cases where it augments rather than replaces? submitted by /u/sychophantt
Originally posted by u/sychophantt on r/ArtificialInteligence