JodieBenitez

> we do not have proof at this point that code flaws are intentionally introduced.

I'm not american, but ok, why not :)

> Multi-page applications are slow to load and navigate.

A bit tired to see this...

No it's not. We do this all the time. It's as simple as using proper HTTP headers for your css/js/pictures/whatever. You can even have smooth page transitions now.

I'm getting old, all my childhood heroes die.

Some of my colleagues say they don't want to be "AI proofreaders", that they'd prefer to do something else. I can't really argue, they are entitled to their own desires of course. But I do enjoy the chat sessions with agents. It's like pair programming with superman.

I'm glad there's a go clone for SQLite, it' easier to integrate into a Go project, especially when you have to support multiple platforms.

There, got my upvote.

Jellybean long version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4Wq3U86SyQ

Blah blah blah.. virtue signaling. Enough said.

> The appropriate reaction to your employer setting rules you don’t agree with is to try to convince them to change those rules,

And that's what I do: nothing is more convincing than great results.

Get off your high horse maybe.

> There is never a “Nothing found, good to go!”

Not entirely true IME. Eventually the bug hunt will end with general design advices that may not be suitable to your use case and that you can skip.

There are no agreed-upon limits, everything is new there. And I don't prioritize feeling good over everything else, otherwise I just wouldn't even start the debate. Far from being fired, I was promoted, because the real world is not your fantasy, results matter more than theorical threats. Also keep your name-calling to yourself.

25 years ago I had to lie about using free software since it was also frowned upon. I even lied to my CTO at the time who wanted me to work completely in a Microsoft environment, with ASP and what not. Being kinda stubborn I did not comply and used only free software. When boss saw the result and the cost I got promoted. My integrity is fine.

Sure. My point is that they will probably accept "AI" contributions anyway, without knowing it.

Sure, but these aspects are rarely brought up by my opponents. And we can discuss them ad lib, but there is no coming back for me.

Let me tell you a story: I use agents at work. Not to add more useless features, not in a let-loose way, not so that I can slack all day but to produce better output. Think performance optimizations, security fixes, better use of underlying frameworks, produce better documentation, get useful hints from the code base, that kind of thing. In a word, to produce objectively better software. that is my honor: giving the best I can.

Because AI is frowned upon where I work, I kept that under the radar. And I got nothing but praises for the good work, everybody loving it. Later I had the opportunity to port a piece of software from one language to another. LLMs are great for porting stuff when steered well. Again, nothing but praises for the amazing work done in a very short time. And this is where I tried to open a debate about AI by disclosing my tools and methods. And boom, suddenly I was evil. Praises gone. But still, none had the guts to throw the port to trash, because it's still very good. Hypocrisy.

So yes, call me sociopath if you like, but I will lie, produce better software and get the praises if I have to work in an environment that values tools and methods over results.

"suspects".... that sounds error prone. And I read it like "we don't want AI generated stuff unless we can't tell the difference".

And how will this be enforced ?

U.S. government will decide who will feed the chinese competition.

I wish it were. Alas...

> For now I have not moved past the point of comprehension being important to me.

Ah ! This is me too... at least for what I have to ship at work. Not so much for my toy/weekend projects. But it turns out agents are also good at explaining.

> “I disabled the test so it’s not run so now all the tests pass” is not a hypothetical it’s pretty common.

I've never seen that though.

> If you split it perfectly, the two halves will almost certainly both fall to each side

Just put it in a old small tire :)

We still want readable language. We still want code we can check and modify ourselves. For now.

I was a "good" (whatever that means !) SW engineer long before Claudex. At least good enough that both users and bosses had nothing but praises. And I always took my job and the needs of the users seriously.

It's "just another tool", sure. But one that is so powerful that some things that used to take a day now take minutes, or ones that used to take a week now take a day. And I get even more praises now, along with more time to focus on understanding the needs and controlling quality. For me it's not really about stuffing as much features as possible, but providing better software.

I'm glad this happened after 25 years in my career. I believe I'm in a privileged position where I can benefit from LLMs and still have the knowledge to effectively correct the machine or go back to "manual mode" if anything goes wrong.

> the maintainers seem to have let AI loose on rsync

is it an assumption ?

No, but who said that ?

hey... claudex helps me being that.

I'll stick to this advice: https://kerkour.com/rust-backend-services-problems