Liam Mayfair

Agreed.

A lot of the time the cause of bad UX or poor quality code is not the Devs, but management, one way or another. Either through pressure to build more to increasingly delirious timelines or by not looking after their company culture.

You tend to see nonsensical, disjointed product UX and usability decisions a lot more in bigger, highly hierarchical organisations, with big teams, highly specialised, siloed ICs several levels removed from their end users by layers and layers of middle management fat.

I imagine if HSBC put out apps like OP’s article claims is because they probably follow a command and control structure like above, where developers are just tiny cogs hyper-focused on low-level tasks in a bigger, complex corporate machine and nobody really understands the full picture.

But you can validate the business rules with the people that make them: the business or your users?

I get some companies do things pretty fucking backwards and QA as a separate function is harmful, pointless and should be abandoned.

However, I don’t see how anyone from QA is going to physically stop your from testing and validating your code. As a dev, you could be more proactive in understanding what you’re building, why you’re building it, and how to make sure it works and it does what your stakeholders/users need it to do.

If you don’t, then refer to OP’s post.

Yes they would, in theory, because those prosthetics she’s wearing were NHS-funded. I can see the waitlist to get ones like those being pretty fucking long though but hey, what NHS waitlist is not pretty fuck long these days anyway