81–90 of 266 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having not been formally verified, almost all software today feels cheap. Maybe an AI can change that at some point.
Yay let’s lock ourselves into the formal verification toolsets, so that we can never use new language features again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am here to discuss my opinions on AI for software development because it's interesting. Not because I am selling a book or to prove anything to you. If I had any special approach, I would be reluctant to share it with my potential competitors. That said, I do not. It just works. Meanwhile people here are posting the thesis that agentic development without careful code review results in an unmaintainable application…
> Meanwhile people here are posting the thesis that agentic development without careful code review results in an unmaintainable application. > I theorize that this is not something they experienced in practice, because it did not happen for me. Are you currently maintaining the application? Like it's in production with paying users? You've only been on the app for 4 months. Compare that to something like Emacs that…
No, my app is not published yet. It will probably take another month, with hopefully no complications arising out of the AppStore review process.
Then, I hope the ad campaign financials work out to compete with old apps of a lower quality that already boast no less than a million reviews.
I get it, you want me to make a case that can objectively convince you of the usefulness of agentic development without code review.
From my perspective, I have no interest in doing so, and I can only share my experience so far. In a few months time we will know more objectively whether my ambitions paid off.
Until then, you will either have to take my word for the quality of the product, or spend tens to hundreds of hours of effort in trying the approach for yourself. OP's article does not contain any specifics for where and how supposedly agentic development failed him either.
AI generated code is like IKEA furniture. IKEA furniture embodies many elements of good cabinet making but skips many nonessential elements. And does this more consistently than cabinet makers who can be bored, incompetent, depressed, burnt out, resentful, tired, having a bad day. In the future AI code inevitably will embody most good software engineering practices. And will do this more consistently than software en…
What a sad analogy. IKEA furniture is mostly cheap particle board crap and it's a shame that we as a humanity have cheapened our lives to the point where IKEA is some kind of standard (and the only thing) most people can afford. Back in the day furniture was artisanal and hand made yet people were able to afford and have it. Isn't that in fact weird, supposedly our societies are richer than ever before but most peopl…
AI generated code is like IKEA furniture. IKEA furniture embodies many elements of good cabinet making but skips many nonessential elements. And does this more consistently than cabinet makers who can be bored, incompetent, depressed, burnt out, resentful, tired, having a bad day. In the future AI code inevitably will embody most good software engineering practices. And will do this more consistently than software en…
What a sad analogy. IKEA furniture is mostly cheap particle board crap and it's a shame that we as a humanity have cheapened our lives to the point where IKEA is some kind of standard (and the only thing) most people can afford. Back in the day furniture was artisanal and hand made yet people were able to afford and have it. Isn't that in fact weird, supposedly our societies are richer than ever before but most peopl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having not been formally verified, almost all software today feels cheap. Maybe an AI can change that at some point.
Yay let’s lock ourselves into the formal verification toolsets, so that we can never use new language features again.
I have an open question for software engineers out there: As someone that has never studied CS but has written basic code most of my life (accelerated now with AI), where is the best place to learn software engineering fundamentals?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Prompt injection. Solved. But accidentally breaking systems is not an issue either, obviously. Even though the system prompt asks for safety rails, and other prompts wouldn't accidentally violate that. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-10/ai-assistant-hacks-gy...
Alignment of the latest models is questionable, yes. That's a different topic. For this particular gym incident, supposedly Opus 4.6 was used in OpenClaw, predating the current safety guardrails of Fable and co.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a sad analogy. IKEA furniture is mostly cheap particle board crap and it's a shame that we as a humanity have cheapened our lives to the point where IKEA is some kind of standard (and the only thing) most people can afford. Back in the day furniture was artisanal and hand made yet people were able to afford and have it. Isn't that in fact weird, supposedly our societies are richer than ever before but most peopl…
There's probably also a factor of less artisanal goods being made but yes, I agree
Also with the much larger population today, a small percentage of craftsmen still dwarfs the output of the past.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basically all the examples of LLM's building impressive things have been because they have human written tests to base the implementation on. If you have an LLM write the tests the results are far less impressive or valuable.
Yes and LLMs are known to cheat on tests written by them.
But do the same SWE fundamentals apply if the one doing the programming is many times smarter than us?
Rewriting from scratch is basically never an option after a certain amount of time.
Maybe the machines could just start from scratch each time and come at maintainability from a totally different angle