I didn't read it that way, that the author assumes tests are used as a reliability indicator. I really liked the example of the discounts applied to the shopping cart: it shows the difference between systems thinking and spec-checklist thinking (for lack of a better term). Writing individual tests for specific scenarios that failed (and then were fixed in isolation) is a reactionary approach that fails to think about or understand the system as a whole.
Recognizing and understanding that there's a larger problem with discounts is systems thinking. Fixing the code so that all discounts are applied in a predictable order, rather than just fixing the specific issue reported by a user, is systems thinking. Ditching the individual tests that independently cover the user-reported bug input/output, and replacing it with a test that covers the actual discount application ordering intended and expected and (hopefully) implemented by the code, is systems thinking.
Maybe that doesn't (or does?) illustrate the "Stop Hunting In Tests" concept, but I thought it was important nonetheless.
Recognizing and understanding that there's a larger problem with discounts is systems thinking. Fixing the code so that all discounts are applied in a predictable order, rather than just fixing the specific issue reported by a user, is systems thinking. Ditching the individual tests that independently cover the user-reported bug input/output, and replacing it with a test that covers the actual discount application ordering intended and expected and (hopefully) implemented by the code, is systems thinking.
Maybe that doesn't (or does?) illustrate the "Stop Hunting In Tests" concept, but I thought it was important nonetheless.