zlacker

>>tablet+(OP)
Weird to claim the llm does all the boring learning and boilerplate for you as a selling point, but then also insist we still need to responsibly read all the output, and if you can't understand it's a "skill issue".

Also the emphasis on greenfield projects? Starting is by FAR the easiest part. That's not impressive to me. When do we get to code greenfield for important systems? Reminds me of the equally absurd example of language choice. You think you get to choose? What?

Imagine all the code these agents are going to pump out that can never be reviewed in a reasonable time frame. The noise generated at the whim of bike-shedding vibe coders is going to drown all the senior reviewers soon enough. I'll call that Cowboy Coders on Steroids. Anyone with skills will be buried in reviews, won't have time for anything else, and I predict stricter code gen policies to compensate.

>>r0s+6T
And (rigorously) reviewing code is easily 10x harder than writing it.

But this won't stop it from happening.

>>layla5+3V
I really don't think that's true at all. Anyone here can read and sign off on 1000 lines of code faster than they can write the same 1000 lines of code, pretty much no matter what the code is.

>>meowfa+Y31
It also depends heavily on the language.

I can review 100x more Go code in a set amount of time than I can, say React.

With Go there are repetitive structures (if err == nil) and not that many keywords, it's easy to sniff out the suspicious bits and focus on them.

With Javascript and all of the useWhatevers and cyclic dependencies and functions returning functions that call functions, it's a lot harder to figure out what the code does just by reading it.