Chaos has a cost too. You need to weigh that against the cost of testing. And both chaos and testing cost exist on a very broad continuum. For very trivial pr

Chaos has a cost too. You need to weigh that against the cost of testing. And both chaos and testing cost exist on a very broad continuum. For very trivial prototypes, spending even a few hours on tests obviously outweighs any benefits. And 100% unit testing coverage never pays off even on larger projects. However a few hours of setting up CI/CD with linting, type checking, required reviews, automated deployments, and yes some sanity checking integration tests, can provide massive velocity benefits that pay back the investment in a few days and are pure velocity windfall thereafter. I think you (a) have been burned (and I'm not denying testing can be a waste of time) and (b) not being a dev yourself you don't fully understand that this isn't a black and white issue or that you are actually paying a massive velocity cost by doing zero testing. Your POV is akin to advising people to not drink water on a hot, strenuous hike because "every time you lift your arm to drink, you are wasting energy that could go to your legs". Uh yeah, in both cases it's a little more complicated than that. Definitely don't waste an hour making a gourmet meal (and yes I get sometimes devs do this), but there are a spectrum of options and there is a sweet spot. How about "drink some gatorade and eat a power bar without slowing down"? Getting that balance right isn't trivial but it is possible and the payoff is huge. Which goes to the other point you made about not hiring expert devs, man, you've been hiring the wrong experts if you think fresh, unsupervised bootcampers are a better choice at any stage other than "can you make me a framer prototype over the weekend?".