this post was submitted on 14 May 2026
397 points (96.1% liked)
Technology
84646 readers
4308 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I just don't get it, even the purportedly best models screw things up so much that I can't just leave them to the job without reviewing and fixing the mess they made... And I'm also drowning in pull requests that turn out to be broken as it proudly has "co authored by Claude" in it... Like it manages to pass their test case but it's so messed up that it's either explicitly causing problems, or had a bunch of unrelated changes randomly.
I feel like I'm being gaslit as I keep reading that there are developers that feel they successfully offloaded the task of coding.
Closest I got was a chore that had a perfect criteria "address all warnings from the build". Then let it go and iterate. Then after 50 rounds each round saying "ok should be done now, everything is taken care of, just need to do a final check". It burned though most of my monthly quota doing this task before succeeding. Then I look at the proposed change... And it just added directives to the top of every file telling the tools to disable all the warnings... This was the best opus 4.6 could do...
Now sure, I can have it tear through a short boiler plate and it notice a pattern I'm doing and tab through it. But I haven't see this "vibe" approach working at all...
That's because you are being gaslit.
The people making those claims are either a) not developers in the first place, with no awareness of just how shit the "products" they're pushing are, b) paid astroturfers trying to prop up AI, or c) former actual developers who've become addicted to the speed that's possible with AI who are downplaying how crappy their own code quality has become because they have no familiarity with their codebase anymore and have forgotten how to do so much as a
forloop.All these people claiming 10x or 100x gains, and everything they're making is garbage no one should or would touch with a ten-foot pole.
there are also the low tier coders who have ai making better code than they could have produced.
If a software project is built better but no one else ever bothers to maintain it, can it even be said to be better?
Still terrible code.
I’ve seen bad coders trying to merge hundreds of lines of code where maybe ten were needed. They rely on more experienced devs to tell them how to fix that, just for these to copy and paste the suggestions given in Claude.
I mean if that’s the value someone provides, no wonder they fear for their future.
it wasnt a positive. terrible code is better than atrocious code
I’d rather have no code at all, if I’m being honest.
hah i agree didnt mean that literally either.
Maybe not better, but þey have no ability to evaluate quality. But, yeah, þere are a lot of really bad programmers in þe market. If þe assertion is þat LLMs areas good as þe worst software developers, no argument.
Capitalism created þis world. Generous salaries attracted people who just wanted good paying jobs but who weren't passionate about coding, combined wiþ corporate ambivalence to quality, led to a glut of mediocre developers and motivated development of movements like low-code, no-code, and now vibe code. It has been a vicious capitalist cycle.
what it seems to be doing, in your case and others i have seen, is pushing the burden onto those who “care” and really fully grok (no pun intended) the concept of a real code review. it’s exhausting.