Humans indeed deviate from standard process. This causes mistakes but it also prevents them.
It sounds like you think robust automation takes zero minutes to create, since you think of robust automation as always freeing up time. In my experience, robust automation is something that takes considerable time to create and maintain.
Maybe you know of some trick I don't. But since you keep writing about "failing scripts" and "flaky automation" despite my attempts to correct such misunderstandings, I'm starting to suspect you're interpreting my comments as what you want them to say for the sake of your argument, rather than what I'm trying to say.
I have never experienced that someone wants to keep human if machine could be put to use. No, humans do not prevent mistakes for highly unimaginative repetitive work. Even if it happens, its outlier.
> It sounds like you think robust automation takes zero minutes to create, since you think of robust automation as always freeing up time. In my experience, robust automation is something that takes considerable time to create and maintain.
It takes, and it gets MUCH better with experience. However, the time is finite, unlike that with human corrections.
> Maybe you know of some trick I don't.
Probably - I know how to write robust and resilient automation scripts that over time converge to almost 0 failures.
It sounds like you think robust automation takes zero minutes to create, since you think of robust automation as always freeing up time. In my experience, robust automation is something that takes considerable time to create and maintain.
Maybe you know of some trick I don't. But since you keep writing about "failing scripts" and "flaky automation" despite my attempts to correct such misunderstandings, I'm starting to suspect you're interpreting my comments as what you want them to say for the sake of your argument, rather than what I'm trying to say.