| ▲ | jiggawatts 4 days ago | |
> With this approach, how would you measure the effectiveness of the sunscreen when it's been absorbed by the skin You can eliminate the "can't possibly work" cases much faster and cheaper. More importantly, it is cheap enough to be always used as a baseline verification when human testing is so expensive that it can only be used as a random sample double-check. It's like unit testing vs full user acceptance testing. You can and should do both, but the latter isn't for every PR. | ||
| ▲ | chimeracoder 3 days ago | parent [-] | |
> More importantly, it is cheap enough to be always used as a baseline verification > It's like unit testing vs full user acceptance testing. You can and should do both, but the latter isn't for every PR. You say all this as if it weren't already happening. OP was surprised human testing was being conducted at all, not that non-human testing wasn't being done (which is a claim nobody made, and which isn't true). | ||