[SirensOfTitan]

I don't really think this is at all at the quality bar for posts here. This is obviously AI-slop -- why should I invest more time reading your slop than you took to write it?

Even so, at what point do we consider the LLM-ification of all of tech a hazard? I've seen Claude go and lazily fix a test by loosening invariants. AI writes your code, AI writes your tests. Where is your human judgment?

Someone is going to lose money or get hurt by this level of automation. If the humans on your team cannot keep track of the code being committed, then I would prefer not to use your product.

[Tade0]

> I've seen Claude go and lazily fix a test by loosening invariants.

He does pull a sneaky on you from time to time, even nowadays, in v4.6, doesn't he?

To me it's analogous to the current situation at the strait of Hormuz - it's an enormous crisis but since almost everyone has a buffer of oil stockpiles, we can pretend it's not there.

[fullstackchris]

this is extremely strawman - with this your basically saying any software ever that has parts written by automation or cron jobs (even before llms) is not a product worth using? foolish.

[SirensOfTitan]

Your response reads much more like a strawman than my original comment.

I’d challenge you to identify where in my post I said I wouldn’t use software that employs automation?

It is pretty clear I am not talking about running CI for automated and predictable signals or cron jobs. I am talking about using AI to write code and also fix tests.

It is exceedingly clear in practice that the volume of code produced by LLMs is too much for the humans using these tools to read and understand. We are collectively throwing decades of best practices out of the window in service of “velocity.” Even the FAANG shops I know of who previously had good engineering cultures seem to be endorsing the cult of: AI generated everything with stamp approval.

[rogerrogerr]

Cron jobs are not capable of flat-out deceit.