Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 667 posts

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#331

Post by hashstring »

harrall wrote: post #326
programmertote wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have at least one coworker who literally copy-paste AI output to respond to code and doc reviews (and most of her communications like on Teams and Asana) despite me telling her multiple times to take it a notch down. Two days ago, she started answering my doc review questions with literally AI outputs (like "Good question. " and "You're right. "). That really bothered me that I finally announced AI "code of conduct…

If I were to be real, my coworkers that post AI responses straight rarely had insightful comments before AI.

Yeah, but now it’s more confidently slowing us down… It kind of sucks. Someone else said that non-SMEs can’t filter through the noise and may actually mistake the AI slop for signal, which worsens the problem.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#332

Post by hashstring »

tcp_handshaker wrote: post #311
stack_framer wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The useless suggestions are exhausting. One of my co-workers uses Claude for all asynchronous communication, including Slack messages, Jira comments, code reviews, and emails. Every single message from him, literally every time he communicates, it's a massive wall of text, overflowing with scope-creep suggestions like nothing I've ever seen before. It's impossible to ask him a simple question and get a simple answer.…

Have you tried to prompt inject your colleague? It works wonderfully with my boss.

Really? Explain please haha

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#333

Post by zhengyi13 »

shuwix wrote: post #310
mettamage wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like humans, AI needs a "reality" to check things against. If we don't provide that in an automated way, somehow, it will always make mistakes and we'd have to point it out. Since, at that point, we're just mediating with what reality gives us and what an AI should do with it. AI doesn't have enough senses yet. It's trapped in a box.

There's an old programming rule since 90's: By fixing a bug, 3 new bugs appear. I can imagine the quality of bug fixing by unsupervised (we save money by layoffs) halucinating AI at current state of development.

The way I learned it was:

"99 bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code... Fix one bug, compile it again, 101 bugs in the code!"

(To the tune of 99 Bottles Of Beer)

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#334

Post by dawnerd »

runarberg wrote: post #242
truncate wrote: post #5

Not that I don't believe its possible to fix a lot of bugs, I also wonder what the actual dynamic was. Were the people in team working much more than usual as well? Given its Google, I wouldn't be surprised if there was an "internal push" to fix more bugs over next X sprints so that they can publish this blog and some manager can show impact and AI adaption to his superior.

This is just my hypothesis, but I suspect that at Chrome‘s engineering team there has been a culture of inaction for the past decade or more. That nothing gets done, no bugs fixed, unless some higher ups at Google sees a business interest in resolving it. And what has changed now is that the higher ups at Google do indeed see a business interest in fixing bugs and giving the credit to AI to sell us more AI.

Think that’s the case at a few big companies. No doubt Microsoft trying to clean Windows up will give credit to their new ai models.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#335

Post by overgard »

user43928 wrote: post #232
cautiouscat wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you. > I think detractors believe you should just let AI do the job blindly instead of leveraging it as a tool to accelerate you. However this is how it’s marketed. C-suite is telling people eventually you won’t need to read code, frontier labs saying programmers won’t exist etc. The reality is like you said, a tool to accelerate you.

You can today develop a mobile app with 20 screens without ever reviewing any of the code generated. If you test each feature and have it iterate on your feedback, you can build a decent product in this way. Does it write too much code? Perhaps. Could I bring those 100k lines through code review in a team where some members nitpick? No. That does not change the fact that it works, and that you do not need to read the…

I really hope vibe coded apps have to be labeled as such so I can make sure to avoid using them. As a customer, I have zero interest in using something that was made with little care or expertise.

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#336

Post by sirsinsalot »

bmurphy1976 wrote: post #294
2sk21 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats fine but then Fable 5 should have requested this information instead of blundering along. So why didn't it? An expert human asked to do the same task would have surely asked for the additional data.

Let me translate this for you: "I have not spent the time cultivating the soft skills necessary to leverage this tool successfully therefore it's the tool that sucks."

Even if true, this kind of response is unhelpful and fosters dismissal of your point. This kind of attitude more broadly paints AI advocates as cultists because they refuse to engage beyond "you're doing it wrong".

How about give pointers on "doing it right?"

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#338

Post by tempest_ »

stack_framer wrote: post #301
VBprogrammer wrote: post #17

I've recently been using AI a lot for performance optimisation during a particularly busy period at work. I would say it was almost completely useless at the high-level direction - it would point out suspicious parts of SQL queries for example but on back to back testing these almost never resulted in any performance change. In fact, if it wasn't for the fact that it made making the actual changes I identified much e…

The useless suggestions are exhausting. One of my co-workers uses Claude for all asynchronous communication, including Slack messages, Jira comments, code reviews, and emails. Every single message from him, literally every time he communicates, it's a massive wall of text, overflowing with scope-creep suggestions like nothing I've ever seen before. It's impossible to ask him a simple question and get a simple answer.…

If these people are glorified copy paste scripts why are they even employed....

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#339

Post by jayd16 »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #31
truncate wrote: post #5

Not that I don't believe its possible to fix a lot of bugs, I also wonder what the actual dynamic was. Were the people in team working much more than usual as well? Given its Google, I wouldn't be surprised if there was an "internal push" to fix more bugs over next X sprints so that they can publish this blog and some manager can show impact and AI adaption to his superior.

Google's entire modus operandi has been "automate everything" for decades. They've been doing this with fuzzers, with project zero and so on. Adding LLMs on top is a very obvious next step. And LLMs improving and finding more bugs also follows. Then improve the harness and the dev tools, to better use the LLMs. And then everything together end-to-end to find-triage-fix-confirm. Your LLMs are as good as the loop they…

So thinking about this, do you think these bugs are all unique or are there a small set of new bug categories that were found and once automated resulted in many separate bug fixes?

For many of the new bugs, do we think they would all have been prioritized in the past? Are these all critical bugs that would have all been addressed in a timely fashion or are they getting done because its easier to do.

Another way to ask it would be, do we think we're discovering that Chrome had more big holes than we thought or are we raising the security bar by fixing smaller holes?

Re: Google fixed more Chrome bugs in June than over the past two years, thanks to AI

#340

Post by sirsinsalot »

toader wrote: post #316
stackskipton wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate these type of questions, they scream "YOUR HOLDING IT WRONG." My experience is if you have been racking up the tech debt and have some low hanging fruit, Claude is really good at cleaning it up. If you have been properly stewarding the project, it's much less effective.

If YOU'RE going to be snarky at least use proper grammar.

Way to prove their point.
Post reply on HN