Only if you want to go over everything.
If you don’t: you either need to make someone else responsible and accountable for going over something, or be accountable for not being responsible.
Remember:
A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision.” – IBM Training Manual, 1979.
I guess you missed all those studies/results about:
The only way to go over something yourself correctly is by doing it yourself correctly.
and no proof that the AI has actually been a burden
You commenting that just highlights that you’ve either never had to work with a developer who uses AI, or do not have the adequate level of skill to correctly review something submitted by a developer who uses AI.
LLMs can provide value in software development, especially in senior developer hands.
The value they do provide is in scamming and providing skill atrophy.
Depends how big the pizzas are
You think that’s bad, check their “high score” here: https://www.dayswithoutgithubincident.com/
Only something created by a human can be copyrightable. (See the copyright status of monkey who took a selfie for precedent).
Any code written by an LLM is not copywritable because a human did not write it.
Also the company that trained the LLM is likely in breach of the licenses the code palls under.
If the rewrite is based on something which has a license that your company can’t use, then the rewrite likely can’t be used either
write something that already exists so it doesn’t need to think
If something already exists, it shouldn’t need to be rewritten.
Doing otherwise is a sign that something has gone wrong.
That was the case before LLMs and it is still the case today.
The first month is inputted with a 1 and exported as a 0.
The first day is inputted with a 1 and exported as a 1.
Also: January is not always the 1st month, sometimes it is the 0th.
1/1/2026 can be both Jan 1st, and Feb 1st.
For the downvoters, try it in your browser’s terminal:
let test = new Date("1-1-2026");
console.log(`Year: ${test.getFullYear()}, Month: ${test.getMonth()}, Day: ${test.getDate()}`);
// Prints -> Year: 2026, Month: 0, Day: 1
// --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
// test.getFullYear() returns the year, but test.getYear() only returns the number of years since 1900
// test.getMonth() returns the month, but the first month is 0-indexed
// test.getDate() returns the day, 1-indexed, but test.getDay() returns the current day right now and not the day of the date object
it’s good at answering questions like that
Are you sure about that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtBI2BvPKBQ
Remember: if you don’t know enough about the topic in question to grade its answers then you’re not judging its ability to answer accurately, you’re judging it’s ability to convince you.
It’s for the best.
Learning how code works is better than getting an LLM to produce convincing looking code without anyone having an understanding of how it works.
LLMs just teach students to paint themselves into a corner without them even realising why bad things keep happening to them.
More like “why the fuck would I walk all the way across the city now that I own a car”
That’s a bad analogy.
Using an LLM for coding gives you an initial speed up with the trade off being skill atrophy, and a build up of cognitive debt in the project.
A better analogy would be the Greek government before their national debt crisis. It would have been better to invest in themselves, not lie about their own finances, and not kick the can down the road. But they kept lying and kicking the can down the road because it was easier in the short term. Of course, we all know how that turned out in the end.
You’re way quicker manually reviewing code compared to setting up everything just so that an LLM agent could do that.
Not only that, you’re better off reviewing the code manually so you understand how everything works.
If you understand how things work, you can plan things out.
If you don’t, you’ll end up painting yourself into a corner.
If you are scared of that, commercial products are your choice.
Commercial products are not a panacea for bad software quality.
Code openness and code quality are independent, orthogonal axes.
Probably a good time to consider helix or ki over vim
If the code is reviewed and tested, I don’t care if it was written by a human or machine.
That’s a pretty big assumption there buddy.
If they didn’t care enough to write the code, what makes you think they cared enough to review or test the code?
No!
PopOS switched to Cosmic which only just came out.
Recommend PopOS to users with experience, who know how to fix/avoid problems.
But, hold off from recommending PopOS for beginners until around the 27.10 release when most of the papercuts are sanded over.
Yes and no.
There’s a lot to be said about empathy, assumed knowledge/expertise, acquisition of knowledge/expertise, mentorship, deadlines, etc…
But on the other hand, there are psychological effects that result in people being truly blind to alternatives. It’s not that they don’t think the alternative is correct, or that they don’t want to spend mental/emotional energy on learning an alternative. It’s that they truly can’t even consider that there is an alternative until they are explicitly told to use it. That website exists for those people.