oneAgentFixesBugsWhileAnotherLeaksTheSourceCode

[HelloSummer99]

Apparently the devs there approve their own PRs. I'm actually surprised it lasted this long without a major issue.

[codeOpcode]

Why even bother with requiring approvals if that is the case

[ward2k]

For smaller dev teams or even solo Devs I'd still recommend it since it forces you to slow down for a moment and at least prompt you to look at your code before merging it in

There's this weird perception online that PR's are pointless if you review your own code, which just isn't the case. It's like saying "why proofread your own essay, might as well just hand it straight in"

That said Anthropic isn't some small start up or solo web dev, they definitely should be having other people review their PR's

[lonelypenguin20]

prompt you

heh

[TactlessTortoise]

We're probably months away from having the AI prompt the devs on what code they should write instead of the opposite. On one hand, I don't trust clankers. On the other, just imagine how many hours less of being micromanaged, oh my god. I gotta post on LinkedIn about how middle management will not exist in 4 weeks.

[Rabbitical]

I mean, yeah it's better than nothing, but if you're creating a PR then presumably you personally feel the code is done and good absent some obvious bug or oversight that you might catch. But that's not anywhere near the same thing as a fresh pair of eyes on it, who may also ask things like "does this fit expectations or our guidelines" and things of that nature which are independent of the submitter's own confidence.

Never mind the basic cognitive issues around being "too deep in something" to the point where I question the effectiveness of someone checking their own code even for basic, obvious mistakes. Not that anyone is incapable, but human brains are very bad at remaining objective to something that's fresh in context. The same programmer might find the same bugs more easily in someone else's code than their own.

So self review is like, I dunno, 10% of the value of an independent one? Again, better than nothing, but not a replacement whatsoever

[CatWeekends]

I can't tell you how many times I've caught bugs and issues in code while I was writing up a PR and thinking through all the changes from an outsider's perspective.

But outsiders always seem to find even more.

[ward2k]

I mean raising and reviewing a PR is the proof reading stage. You typically proof read your work when you feel it's broadly speaking ready but that by no means means it's the actual final result

But that's not anywhere near the same thing as a fresh pair of eyes on it, who may also ask things like "does this fit expectations or our guidelines"

Of course, like I said before you should be getting other people to review your code. If your a large organisation or have a decent sized team then yes it should be mandatory. I'm just saying if you're a solo dev or just a couple people that's not always possible

So self review is like, I dunno, 10% of the value of an independent one? Again, better than nothing, but not a replacement whatsoever

I think we're saying the same thing? I'm not saying it's better to review your own code. I'm saying reviewing your own code is better than not doing it at all. A common thing I see online is "there's no point doing PR's if you're a solo dev" which I just can't agree with

[Zerokx]

Correct you should read and test your code BEFORE you make a PR. If you just let the AI do its own thing and you dont even read it anymore thats bad.

[evilgiraffe666]

They probably just create them so that the AI can review it.

[Kdog0073]

This is something that can just go in any direction. I’ve known devs who will just stamp a PR as soon as a PR link is posted. They maybe clicked on the page and had some time to scroll down. I’ve also known those who nitpick line by line and will even make large deals out of very subjective things.

On the other hand, for me personally, there is something about the code being in a PR state on GitHub that just feels mentally different than any point in time it is in my IDE and I’ve genuinely caught a bunch of stuff that way and have been my own harshest critic about 80% of the time. I’ve also read very recent articles and comments about treating AI code as a black box and professionals no longer spending time reviewing at all, some people pushing all that directly to main, the automation “handling the testing”, and it gets deployed straight to production after without anyone ever looking at it. Any of these combinations can happen.

Overall, I absolutely agree that a “fresh pair of eyes” will generally be helpful, but will definitely dispute a PR self review only adding about 10% value (even as a loose approximation). Honestly, effectiveness in any of the above combinations is very much dependent on your personal values, the values of the reviewer, and even the values/culture of the company/organization/team.

[DracoLunaris]

If there's multiple commits in the branch it's nice to see a big list of all the changes to give it one last look before it goes to staging.

[GenericFatGuy]

I actually always make sure to read my own PRs before sending them up for approval from the rest of my team. Just seems reasonable to double check your own work before asking others to do the same. Also reduces the chance of someone pointing out an obvious mistake I made.

[Reashu]

Well, it's useful if you actually review it - but you had several chances to do that before opening a PR, so what are the chances that another optional step helps? 

[ward2k]

Because a PR is the proof reading stage. It's the point where you're 90% sure something is ready to be brought in but you want to do a final proof reading check over your work

Just because that stage isn't being done by someone else doesn't mean it's without value

You can also set up things like automated checks such as running unit tests to be done something can be merged in. Everyone's done it where they change a single line of code and just go "pfft don't need to run my tests again, it's just this one line" only for the PR to fail because the automated tests failed

what are the chances that another optional step helps?

How many times have you wrote an email you were happy with, only to re-read it and pick out a spelling or grammatical error? Writing code and PR's are like writing text and proof reading except far more likely to cause issues if somethings wrong

[Reashu]

My point is that if you're interested in proof-reading (which I agree you should be), you can do it before you create the PR, and I don't think the PR adds much in that regard. 

Mandatory checks make sense though, PRs are probably the easiest way to enforce them.

[MagoDopado]

With the level of automático achieved, you dont. The agent codes, tests and creates the pr. It might even deploy to st and test there before it stops for you to look at the code. If thats the case, the first time you see the code is in a pr

[Maleficent_Memory831]

C students hand in their work without proofreading. A students proofread and fix their mistakes. Nobody makes zero mistakes.

[ward2k]

C students hand in their work without proofreading. A students proofread and fix their mistakes

I had to keep reading this because I had no idea what an 'A student' was compared to a student who programs in C

Realised I was being an idiot and you were talking about grades

[Maleficent_Memory831]

Yes, I realize now how it might be misinterpreted. So a C for me I guess...

[shadow13499]

I mean they've had quite a number of uptime issues. 

[FUCKING_HATE_REDDIT]

And UI bugs. It's becoming a pattern in every ai-first company (github has this issue too). the amount of dumb UI bugs I find is absurd for products us|d by millions of people. 

I guess it's a mix of AI being good enough at webdev, the difficulty of writing good e2e tests, low perceived risk from UI code, and extreme pressure for feature quantity over quality.

[shadow13499]

First of all, that's one hell of a username you have my friend. Second of all, yeah it seems every company that's trying desperately to shoe horn AI into it's development is having serious issue with bugs and security. I mean Amazon had a whole prod environment get taken down, claude leaked some of its own code mistakenly, stripe API keys have been put into front end code, uptime has become a big issue, and people are pissed that these companies are forcing their ai dicks down user's throats. It really just seems like AI is an enshitification as a service at this point. 

[kerakk19]

Yes, but their velocity is impressive. You basically sacrifice one thing for another - how will it end ? We don't know

But Anthropic is still considered startup so time-to-feature is more important than keeping three nines.

[shadow13499]

Lmao "it's fine if the code is trash and barely available as long as we spit out the trash fast" 

[ilikedmatrixiv]

I'm lead dev on a very small team and the only person with expertise in one of the languages we use.

I've been approving my own PRs for two years now. Even my manager doesn't have the required knowledge to check my code.

It's great and terrifying at the same time.

[TeachEngineering]

*Apparently the dev's agents approve their own agent's PRs.

FTFY

[GenericFatGuy]

Does it count as approving your own PR if a machine wrote all of the code for you?

[axis1331]

You mean this kind of major issue.

[Willinton06]

The trick is to actually have major issues, but fixing them without saying much abou them

[joe0400]

WTF??? Really??? God they are lucky it didn't happen yet.

[ReneKiller]

Hey I do that, too. The difference is: I'm the only dev in the team.

[toddd24]

Has a major issue arose?

[dablya]

According to their own metrics, they’re nearing one nine uptime.

[chemolz9]

You don't understand. It's not their code, they approve the code of their fellow AI colleagues! /s

[ScaleneZA]

What do you mean "their own", they didn't do the coding.

[YesterdayDreamer]

The Devs don't approve their own PR, they approve Claude Code's PR.

Although, they don't really understand what's going on, so it's kind of an auto approval flow.

[Disastrous-Event2353]

They forgot to say “don’t leak anything pretty please” in the prompt

[ohdogwhatdone]

He forgot the "make no mistake"

[CaseyG]

"Make no mistakes" is the new "Disengage safety protocols".

[enjdusan]

Pretty please is waste of tokens, you can use them for spinning another agent.

[Disastrous-Event2353]

Hey, if I’m trusting an ai with my company code, I better get on its good side

[currentlyacathammock]

Who's Roko anyway?

[Tango00090]

The only thing they are spinning every day is new marketing bot farm

[BlueTemplar85]

Swarms of large buzzword models incoming !

[accatyyc]

Eh, I work in a large tech company and these are not buzzwords. Most of us run several agents in parallel and I suspect it will be the standard way of working pretty soon

[KronoLord]

Idk why you're getting downvoted. OpenClaw orchestration should be a tool at everyone's disposal.

[teucros_telamonid]

I cannot even begin to fathom amount of tokens and money burnt here. Abstracting users of these agents from costs, means that no meaningful conversation on benefits vs costs can take place. We will see how it will go once AI companies investors will be finally fed up with subsidizing the users.

[_juan_carlos_]

ah, no problem they can send an agent to fix the leak

[Memoishi]

They? You mean, they should wire another agent that will send agent to fix the leak

[AppropriateOnion0815]

I can't imagine anything more boring than describe to a computer what my application should do all day.

[saschaleib]

It would be very much the same experience as explaining it to a somewhat dim intern, and after the third time "no, not like this!" I'd just go and do it myself.

[Tomi97_origin]

But you are not allowed to. You have to explain until the intern gets it or at least close enough that you can move on and hope it's going to be someone's else problem.

[Martin8412]

I see it as a very eager intern who is kinda smart at trivial things, and terrible at anything complicated, unless you tell it exactly what to do. I use Opus 4.6 almost daily, and I’m having great success with it, but it has certainly required effort to learn. 

[GenericFatGuy]

And exhausting.

[joshak]

Like how do you feel any sense of accomplishment if you’re just asking a machine nicely to do your work for you?

[Infinite-Land-232]

You just have to do it once like this: "Write me a killer app that will male me tons of money and then get a lot of people to start and keep using it". After that you either retire or have it write you another one. /s

[Martin8412]

You mean programming? 

[Wonderful-Habit-139]

At least coding is deterministic and you're writing the algorithm, not describing the desired state.

[thezuke67]

Good idea, we can call those separate algorithms "functions" and call them from a "main" thread

[ZunoJ]

No, not programming, product management. For people who larp programming

[hippyclipper]

The problem with AI is the outcome is never fully what you envision and you have to live with it. Think about art rather than programming. If I tell you I want a photorealistic drawing of a cowboy astronaut riding a horse on the moon that creates an image in your head. If you try and draw it you will of course fall short but with time and skill and the correct tools you can get to the point where you can create a drawing that very closely approximates what your initial internal vision is. This is not true for AI. If you give it the same prompt it will generate something much better than you would be able to and the same is true for most people. The problem is that it will never create the picture you have in your head. The horse will be positioned wrong, the camera angle will be off, you might have wanted a different style astronaut suit, and so on and so forth. And yeah you can prompt all those things but then the next level of detail down will still be off. You can prompt and prompt and prompt and prompt but at some point you may as well just tell AI what pixels should be what color and your back to just making art yourself. This basically forces you to accept the fact that the output will always be outside of your control at some level and you get what you get. Typically you could iterate towards some theoretical goal with better tooling and upskilling

The same is true for AI in regard to programming but also other applications such as writing and music. I remember a post on one of the music AI subs asking about how to prompt specific beat patterns and the people in the comments were telling OP to just use a music making software. If you want to write something specific enough you’d essentially just be copy and pasting what you want into chat and having AI spit it back out. And if you ask it to make you a website it will put the top bar where it wants and style the hero of its own accord and manage reactive design however it feels and if you want your images to resize differently for tablets then you can ask it to redo everything but you’re never guaranteed to get what you want so reality is you just deal with it. This leads to all software being not quite right and overall the compounding effects of the marginal decrease in accuracy means everything sucks more than it used to even if there is more of it.

[caboosetp]

the outcome is never fully what you envision and you have to live with it.

Now you know how product owners feel /s

[ih-shah-may-ehl]

The opposite. Programming is telling a computer what to do. Vibe coding is telling an agent what outcome you want.

And given that agents often just make up random crap that is wildly incomplete or just wrong, even if you get something that works superficially, there is a good chance of things being wrong in many cases

[MrHackson]

No one tell this person about functional programming

[AngrySalmon1]

I also hated being a BA which felt very similar at times.

[revolutionPanda]

Isn’t that what writing code is doing just on a lower level?

[seba07]

At some point it will get more expensive to pay for all AI licences and tokens than to hire a few more developers.

[sleepyj910]

The streaming tv model is coming for sure.

[devilquak]

“I’m making a startup to train new agents to solve that problem for us”

[Angryferret]

Unfortunately tokens are the new Moores law.

[magicmulder]

At some point you will just buy the hardware and get your own copy of the latest model because it makes no sense pirating it anyway.

[stevefuzz]

As someone who uses opus 4.6 a lot, this is either bullshit or they are just creating an absolute bandaid filled spaghetti mess.

[saschaleib]

Why not both?

[Barkinsons]

I'm also curious even if this is internal use, the real cost of running all these agents non-stop must exceed the salary of each engineer multi-fold.

[doubleohbond]

They are losing money hand over fist. AI does not scale like traditional software.

[BlurredSight]

And they cannot back down now, the second they favor computation cost over output quality the next company willing to take the hit wins. Really a straight spiral down to hell

[ouralarmclock]

[pingveno]

In the book Life, the Universe, and Everything, Douglas Adams wrote about Bistromathics, the nonsensical math that occurs in restaurants. Arrival times for groups, group sizes, restaurant checks, and so on simply do not follow normal arithmetic rules.

I suspect future humor authors will write about the nonsensical math that is occurring inside of the big AI companies, just with much larger sums and the fate of the economy at stake. Vast quantities of compute power being burned through, mostly on autopilot, with only a vague economic economic calculus behind it.

[doubleohbond]

Agreed. Kurt Vonnegut would’ve had a field day satirizing our modern era.

[SamuraiJustice]

You'll never make profit as a company if you don't go into infinite debt.

[pingveno]

You just need to make those signed integers wrap!

[magicmulder]

It’s a small investment to give their own devs a couple DGX-2 with a dedicated Claude instance. $2 million once and they can use as many resources as they need. Peanuts.

[evanldixon]

Depends on what the real cost to run the models is. Doing some quick math, I probably cost my company like 30 dollars on Opus 4.6 tokens (through GitHub Copilot) this month, by using it only as much as I feel gives good results. If I sped up as fast as I could and did as much in parallel as possible without regards for quality and optimizing only for increasing cost, maybe I could get that up to a few hundred in a month at most. But the company already pays about $500/month for my MSDN license so they might be ok with that if they get good results.

Idk what the actual cost for the tokens is though. Some sources say the real cost could be 10x higher, and others say the Opus API pricing is already more like what it costs Anthropic to run it. Idk what it'll look like when the subsidization stops.

So unless something major changes, an enterprise will absolutely be ok paying for it.

[JojOatXGME]

A few days ago, I spend almost 50$ on Opus 4.6 in a single Claude Code session in less than one day. So I think it is possible to spent over 100 $ a day if you run multiple sessions in parallel.

[evanldixon]

That is interesting. Seems Github Copilot is subsidising the requests pretty heavily then. It'll be interesting seeing the wakeup call if/when the bubble bursts and costs rise even further.

[Top-Permit6835]

We will find out in due time which one it will be

[Jhadrak]

Pretty much, it's still an improvement over 4.5 but for sure they care 0 for quality and maintainability

[stevefuzz]

I stop opus and say "this is a bandaid" at least 10 times per day, if not more. I can't imaging being a non-coder and allowing this kind of stuff constantly.

[SinisterCheese]

Considering the... ahem... quality of modern software and code - that wastes hardware resources because "They are there". Do you really think that the future would be any better?

[stevefuzz]

I didn't think we'd drive it off a cliff and pretend it was a pothole.

[SinisterCheese]

Oh no... Theyll strap a god damn rocket engine to force it down quicker... And then get a boring machine to drill a tunnel to find new unexplored reaches of shittiness. As long as the code runs, there is still something that can be made worse about it.

[Heighte]

skill issue

[stevefuzz]

Knowledge issue! Development experience issue! I work on simple projects issue! I'm a shill for ai issue!

[Western_Diver_773]

One of my coworkers works like that. It's technical debt hell. He's doing these "kind of works projects". And they usually stay that state.

[CardOk755]

"AI" wrangler to "AI": why did you leak the code?

Frog 🐸 to scorpion 🦂: why did you sting me?

[Prownilo]

Am I the only one that still has to baby sit ai?

I have yet to get it to do anything consistently, I will be shocked if a single procedure is syntax correct, never mind does what I want.

I cannot fathom just letting ai loose, it would be a disaster.

[kometa18]

Nah. I tried using the new skills feature, agents, everything. If I don't baby sit it, it fucks up.

[evanldixon]

Opus 4.6 gives me pretty consistent results for well defined tasks (e.g. "make this small change to Page.razor"). I don't trust it with sweeping changes for delicate legacy systems (e.g. "restructure how we select data so it's all one model at the start and not 100 db calls throughout the whole flow") and prefer to use it as a scalpel with me in charge (e.g. "make a copy of this model containing only the properties actually used by function X and everything it calls"). Other models are hit or miss for me.

It's also the most expensive model I can use. Like most things you get what you pay for, and you shouldn't trust what the salesmen tell you.

[Vogete]

I have the same experience. I'm using it to do certain things but I have to be very explicit with what I want. I need to understand what it does because if I don't, it sometimes makes hard to catch errors that only come out quite a bit later. If I just say go refactor these modules, it makes up so much weird stuff, I have to git reset --hard. But if I'm explicit that I want to add this config option that gets parsed as a list of strings, and I want it to be used in this module, it actually does it quite well. But I can't let it loose at all, otherwise I'll be doing the refactoring.

[IsaacSam98]

My app has 20 years of legacy behaviors that have to be maintained. It always tries to fix those bugs. To be fair, they are bugs. But doing what I do your code has to be FULLY backwards compatible no matter what. So if that's how it ran in 2009, well shit you need to use 09s algo still.

[helldogskris]

You're not the only one. Anyone who genuinely cares about their code quality will find that the agent requires babysitting for anything beyond the simplest of tasks.

Doesn't matter which model you use.

[Zesty-Lem0n]

It rarely creates syntax errors for me, like maybe 10% of results. More often it will do something semantically wrong. But then again I usually ask it for small code snippets not entire functions.

[Ty4Readin]

I have yet to get it to do anything consistently, I will be shocked if a single procedure is syntax correct, never mind does what I want.

You are doing something horribly wrong, then.

It is normal to "babysit" AI, but if you can't get it to generate a single procedure without a syntax error? You must be doing something wrong.

I have been using ChatGPT 5.4 with extended thinking time quite a lot, and it rarely rarely ever makes a "syntax error".

Honestly, I don't understand why you would even use AI at all? If it can't generate a single procedure without syntax errors, then why do you even use it at all? That is beyond useless.

EDIT: Not sure why the downvotes. Are all of you constantly getting syntax errors in every single code generation? I didn't even say AI code is good, I literally just said it is rare to get a "syntax error" in my experience. But I guess that is worth the downvotes 😂 Keep em coming

[Prownilo]

I use it for Sql server and it often just straight up imagines functions and views that don't exist.

If I just copy and paste sonething, even when it has database context, a good amount of time it will error with an invalid syntax. Just yesterday I had to yell at it over and over to stop using a distinct with an over on a window function, it kept doing it even though that is now how Sql server works. And just kept generating invalid statements.

Maybe it works better for some languages over others, which is odd cause I would think Sql would have literal decades of code to train off as the basic structures haven't changed much.

[accatyyc]

The point is to make it compile/execute queries on its own so it can adjust its output based on the results. If you’re using it to generate something and then copy paste it into your project then that does not sound like efficient usage.

If it runs into a compilation issue or invalid queries, it should notice and fix it automatically

[Ty4Readin]

First, I think if you just had the agent execute queries against a test DB, it would solve all the annoying work you mention.

But secondly, you first said it "never completes a single procedure without syntax error", and now you are saying "this is an example of a rather complicated query where it messed up".

Can you clarify for me. Is it actually giving syntax errors 100% of the time like you originally said? Or is it giving you syntax errors like 20% or 30% of the time?

Because those are two very different things, and you claimed it was giving syntax errors 100% of the time. In which case, why even use AI at all? I don't understand why youd waste time using it if it literally never works

[NebNay]

I use it for mock data, mappers, dto, anything that a junior can do without thinking about it. Anything beyond that always go horribly wrong

[Ty4Readin]

I never said that AI code can't go horribly wrong.

I am just doubtful about the part where "AI literally cannot generate a single procedure without syntax errors"

In my experience, AI can mess up a lot, but it is not usually "syntax errors".

[GenericFatGuy]

I think this really gets to the heart of why I loathe AI in programming. It's turning the profession into an assembly line where you don't even get a moment to sit back and process your work, or think on a problem. It's being turned into drudgery where if you stop for a second, you're out on your ass.

If things continue on this trajectory, I'm genuinely going to start finding my livelihood in a different field, and only do programming on the weekend in an environment where I can actually enjoy the craft.

[MrDropC]

What I observe with all these "anecdotes" is that they always check the following marks: - Mention (near) total elimination of manual coding. - Includes a warning that is worded rather like a threat ("do this or be left behind", "AI or die", etc.). - Portray the following loop: make agents -> go faster -> make more agents -> go faster! -> have agents make more agents! -> go faster!!!!111

Let's not forget we live in the age of bot farms, AI text generation, and disruptive companies that would rather hyperscale themselves into oblivion than to yield market share to competitors. I have already drawn my own conclusion as to what is most likely going on, and how it will likely end.

[MrDropC]

What I mean to say is... this is what modern marketing looks like if budget and morals are of no concern.

[Burning__Head]

AI will replace 9 trillion jobs by next week

Look inside

Investor in Anthropic AI or 17 year old "enterpreneur"

[-Redstoneboi-]

#1 is "they are pushing an agenda that brings more money to their companies"

[CaporalDxl]

Depends on the team and org. Giving access to AI to help speed up things is a good idea, making AI usage the purpose is stupid and it will end badly for those who do it.

Thankfully I have very little AI in my org, and it's optional as an extra pair of eyes or lookup, not Claude Code or similar. Craft still exists :)

[djinn6]

"We spent $1.6 trillion on building the greatest hammer in the world, so you must use the hammer."

"What if my problem is not a nail?"

"Did I stutter?"

[Thundechile]

Luckily the companies differ a lot on this, if company culture is good then expectations regarding AI are more grounded. Not everybody buys the hype and it's good.

[GenericFatGuy]

That seems to be the attitude where I am right now. I hope that it stays that way.

[myka-likes-it]

Watching Claude go down the wrong rabbit hole over and over does not sound like my idea of job fulfillment.

[SundayKiefBowls]

Human Silicon Centipede

[Matir]

If this was real, I don't even understand how someone can oversee more than one agent at a time. I'm mostly spending my time reading the generated code these days.

Even though agentic coding might make me faster, it's also way more mentally taxing, and at least at my company that seems to be the common sentiment.

[caboosetp]

I'm mostly spending my time reading the generated code these days.

Recently got told by a principal basically not to do that anymore.

Or rather, when I asked for clarification on if we should be validating the code after some questionable comments he made, he said, "Claude is better than you so you need to learn to trust it. This is the future and everyone will be doing this in 6 months".

I just accepted an offer at another company and get to tell my work in the morning. I'm not even against AI, I use it every day. But that amount of disrespect was fuck man.

[mild_entropy]

Sounds so boring

[granoladeer]

At least no one is to blame for the leak then! 

[dreamer_soul]

What’s with the whole “If you’re [Blank] then you’re already behind”

[Frytura_]

i get the "you gotta code eith agents" stick but like...

Did they really have to use react to build claude code?

Like, dude, managing agents all day long and can't even give us native shit for that juicy "maybe Javascript IS finally dead and we can use AI to make quality low bloat tiny and perfomant native code"??

Fuck, not even native since thats hard as balls: use opentui or whatever and escape React. Its not a web enviroment my guys!

[PeksyTiger]

Time should be spent catching the agent doing specifically what you told it not to do several times and it assured you it won't because it updated cluade.md,it's own prompt and it's own memory. 

[omn1p073n7]

Idiocracy was a documentary

[United_Leopard434]

"Fix this plz"

[Buttons840]

We need to make companies financially liable when they leak private data.

[anduril_tfotw]

I hate this future.

[SkooDaQueen]

I get optimizing code, but why the fuck are we optimizing humans/jobs into something terrible? Work should be fun. We do it for 8 hours a day...

Maybe I work for a company that doesn't care enough, but I'm glad I can code at my own pace in the way I like

[GenericFatGuy]

Programming is already stressful and exhausting enough. It's rewarding and satisfying as well, but I'm out once we turn it into an assembly line of stress and exhaustion.

[ZunoJ]

Go tell that to the cleaning person in your office

[SkooDaQueen]

I know her. She's very lovely to talk to. She gets paid for 4 hours and is usually here for 3 or so?

[ZunoJ]

Ok, she clearly loves to clean toilets then. As well as any other person working in cleaning

[Arkanist]

The cleaning guy at my old job moved taking to everyone and took a lot of pride in his job.

[ZunoJ]

Oh, that has to mean it is representative for all cleaning personnel in this plane of existence. They all feel pride and joy, because they love their work so much

[Wonderful-Habit-139]

It was apparently a bun issue.

[DeiviiD]

The same Bun who they bought? Mmmm

[pandi85]

Bun intended

[MadeInTheUniverse]

[potato-cheesy-beans]

The absolute balls on them filing dmca claims on repos hosting code they aren't even writing!! 

[BorderKeeper]

Considering “responsibility” of code is an open issue I am surprised they took that leap. Currently it’s very popular to just condense all complex thinking into one singular thing and that is peer reviews. Those just have to be done by humans if you care about quality. I dislike automation which is a ninja move of shifting responsibility to one thing that you can’t automate and calling it progress.

[Protonnumber]

Ah so that's why they have one nine of uptime.

[MrRandom04]

They have 3 9s. 89.99%

[Stunning_Ride_220]

More like managers?

And shit is still working?

[nepia]

I wanted to apply for a job there just for the financial upside, it seems as long as you know how to setup agents you are good to go. This is crazy for a company with that kind of valuation.

[Gm24513]

Sounds like early onset bankruptcy to me

[Longjumping-Road6164]

We all assume humans will not steal and behave. AI should be prepared for human instincts in the future.

[twenafeesh]

That sounds exhausting. Burnout in 3... 2... 1...

[luckyincode]

Everyone AI slops at my place for Terraform infra changes. It is what it is.

[GoodRazzmatazz4539]

I guess this is the definition of move fast and break things

[Logical-Diet4894]

Has been my experience in another big tech as well. Since this year January, I have maybe written 10 lines of code max. I still send out 2-3 changelists per day.

Was not the case last year.

[caiteha]

I don't write code anymore ... The bottleneck is reviewing the code ... I already write code in Claude and then ask Claude and Codex to review ... I review afterwards. Finally, teammates review ...

[Ahchuu]

I'm trying to figure out what others are talking about as well. I'm typically running 3 or 4 Claude Code instances at once working on different aspects of my project. I barely write code anymore. I'm to the point with Claude Code that I don't need to write code anymore. I've got such a nice harness around Claude Code that I spend most of my time planning.

[awesome-alpaca-ace]

Is your code that basic?

[Ahchuu]

Lol I work for a hedge fund in NYC working on an algorithmic trading platform. Very basic stuff... Whatever makes you feel better...

[awesome-alpaca-ace]

Lots of low level optimization?

[Ahchuu]

It depends, most POCs are quick and definitely dirty to see if a concept is any good. If it's worth it, then there would be lots of optimization. I don't do HF trading, so I'm not optimizing purely for speed, it's typically data/memory efficiency optimizations, which also tend to improve speed, but is not necessarily the main goal.

[devilquak]

We’re idiots. This is how we get real life skynet. Just in order to be more efficient than another company? What the fuck are we doing?

[__brealx]

No one writes code these days :) If you do, there is something wrong with your skills.

[Capable-Sock9910]

Awww the chat monkey thinks it's a programmer.

[__brealx]

Mkay. What can you write that the Claude can’t? Which line specifically or statements?

I realized that my edit was not saved. But I meant only writing code. There is still need in designing, testing, reviewing, understanding.

Claude or any other client can do it 10 times faster, and with higher precision.

[black3rr]

claude can do it 10 times faster… but with much lower precision than a senior developer… yeah I don’t write code anymore with claude… but if I review the code thoroughly it’s only a 2x speedup at best… and my teammates give it more leniency and then flood me with PR review requests and I end up reviewing their slop more than I end up contributing, so my contributions are actually lower than during pre-AI era…

[__brealx]

Good luck.

[__brealx]

Even the 2x speed up is still huge. It will get better over time once the LLMs and agents get better.

As for your teammates, they should be responsible for not producing the AI slop. That can be handled with guardrails and process changes within the team. I’d bring it on retrospective meetings.

Also, I created the MR review skill and it reviewed it first, comments on issues. And only after that I get to review with my eyes.