The bar just took a very noticeable jump that people are still adjusting to.
Anything the WR can do on it's own is often seen as 'AI slop' - so now what matters is the QB. Because any random junk QB that doesn't meaningfully improve the WR's output is indistinguishable from AI slop. The distinguishing factor is solely the QB.
This has not been my experience inside of a FAANG, in fact rather the opposite: People have been getting praised for AI slop because they can produce it quickly and it’s “good enough”.
The pendulum is slowly starting to swing back a little bit, but mostly because people have realized there’s effectively infinite noise now and doing anything, regardless of how skilled of a QB you are, is not being rewarded.
We're specifically talking about the context of 'LLM-aided human output' not about general capability of these systems.
Some buttons on the front page don't even work.
And then you have Joachim Breitner using Claude Code to produce Soundness proofs in Lean4, mostly vibe coded.
It really is the QB in charge methinks
I have updated the neomacs's landing page, make the "work in progress" indicator more prominent.
Also, I'm working on using neomacs's wasm build as neomacs's landing page:
I believe that, after continuous multiple iterations of development/test， neomacs will undoubtedly become excellent software。