Time and time again I've had a project (such as a DSL to SQL compiler, automatic Rust codegen, CSS development) stall because the LLM took a short sighted decision.
I later found better solutions by querying Reddit and upon consulting the LLM, it basically said "oh shit I'm sorry"
It's honestly pretty arrogant to tell a senior engineer that you "really hope" they've gone over some code. AI generated or otherwise.
I really hope usted checked your code
At this point I'm pretty sure I did the homework for people in college who are now senior engineers
This is commonplace. So commonplace that most have worked “checking the LLM” into their workflow so deeply that essentially all that’s done is prompt followed by a mini code review.
To suggest a senior engineer blindly accepts modifications without code review kinda hints at you not using LLMs to realize how quickly it will make a mess of things if you don’t hold it’s hand.
This whole comment is incoherent. And you're the one "hoping" people check things?
Normally I dislike AI slop in comments, but in this case I think it would be an improvement.
Now it's totally possible that they're an awful developer (who knows!), but it's arrogant to assume that with no evidence.
And I agree, some of the worst devs I've worked with have been PhD's or had otherwise impressive credentials (ostensibly). And I absolutely think at least 1 of them were just lying about their backgrounds.
we have 2 very high value DAU, one of whom is me, and probably will max out at 1000 in our wildest dreams.
long term, our biggest concern is a security regression that lets outsiders see our internal information