Bug pipeline extension of the Twitter discussion

On the great platform Twitter (+8% stocks today) there was a great Tweet about the bug report pipeline.
https://www.satisfice.com/blog/archives/487131
Paul Szymkowiak made this subject even more interesting.
https://www.satisfice.com/blog/archives/487159

Now until this point I agree a bit more with Paul then with James (and Michael).
Paul's list is like so:

• The Bug Exists:
• 1. is producible/ produced
• 2. is observable/ observed
• 3. is comprehensible/ comprehended
• 4. is authenticatable/ authenticated

 

• The Bug Matters:
• a. is reportable/ reported
• b. is receivable/ received
• c. has relevancy/ is relevant
• d. is advocatable/advocated

Now this is the thing,
If only humans where to find bugs, this list was less complex. But we live in a world where unit testing, test automation and a.i. exists.

see also my previous blogs.
http://testenvansoftware.weebly.com/blogs/what-will-ai-testing-look-like

So for the part 'exists',
should we see it like this:

Or more like this way:

In other words. Who should determine the 'exists'?

---