Thread

If AI coding is lowering your code quality, you're not managing quality right

129 points · 169 comments · bucket2015

zug_zug · 1789908167 · focus · HN ↗
I think this is a bit of a simplistic mental approach. I've certainly seen a lot of "The engineer owns the outcome, AI is just a tool, don't release anything you don't vouch for."
However, I just don't think that's realistic. It's asking an author to suddenly become an editor. It's asking somebody who writes code to now read and debug others code.
It can actually be harder to find the the bug in a tricky piece of code than it can be to write your own correct code from scratch. I see AI introduce all sorts of bugs all the time in my personal projects that I would never introduce, and would never think to test for, especially around anything graphical.
1. DANmode · 1789999577 · focus · HN ↗
  > It's asking an author to suddenly become an editor.
  It’s asking an author to suddenly become an editor if they decide to use the robot for a task.
  Certain workplaces are demanding this - but not all.
  Many still just want working commits without tech debt.
  In fact, private and public teams alike are backed up at the PR review stage, so, lots of sane places wouldn’t mind individual contributors using the robot less - especially if its use increases the complexity of reviewing the task.
  Speed isn’t the only variable to optimize for!

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.