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

AI Lazyslop and Personal Responsibility

danielsada.tech

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 75 posts

Re: AI Lazyslop and Personal Responsibility

#11

Post by dkarl »

I have no idea what AI changes about this scenario. It's the same scenario as when Mike did this with 1600 lines of his own code ten years ago; it just happens more often, since Mike comes up with 1600 lines of code in a day instead of in a sprint.

> I don’t blame Mike, I blame the system that forced him to do this.

Bending over backwards not to be the meanie is pointless. You're trying to stop him because the system doesn't really reward this kind of behavior, and you'll do Mike a favor if you help him understand that.

Re: AI Lazyslop and Personal Responsibility

#13

Post by apercu »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #3

> Then, I’d get a ping from his manager asking on why am I blocking the review. If you are in a culture like this, you may as well just ship slop. Management wants to break stuff, that is on them.

I mean, you'll still get blamed even if management pushes you to work in a manner that "breaks stuff".

There is very little accountability in the upper echelons these days (if there ever was) and less each day in our current "leadership" climate.

Re: AI Lazyslop and Personal Responsibility

#14

Post by kibwen »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #3

> Then, I’d get a ping from his manager asking on why am I blocking the review. If you are in a culture like this, you may as well just ship slop. Management wants to break stuff, that is on them.

> Management wants to break stuff, that is on them.

This implies that managers will do both of the following in response to the aforementioned breakage:

1. Understand that their own managerial policies are the root cause.

2. Not use you as a scapegoat.

And yet, if you had managers that were mentally and emotionally capable enough to do both of the above, you wouldn't be in this position to begin with.

Re: AI Lazyslop and Personal Responsibility

#15

Post by dmmartins »

> What was your thought process using AI? > Share your prompts! Share your process! It helps me understand your rationale.

why? does it matter? do you ask the same questions for people that don't use AI? I don't like using AI for code because I don't like the code it generates and having to go over and over until I like it, but I don't care how people write code. I review the code that's on the PR and if there's I don't understand/agree, I comment on the PR

other than the 1600 lines PR that's hard to view, it feels that the author just want to be in the way and control everything other people are doing

Re: AI Lazyslop and Personal Responsibility

#17

Post by epolanski »

Pointless blog post about made up situations that never happened.

1. Companies that push and value slop velocity do not have all these bureaucratic merge policies. They change them or relax them, and a manager would just accept it without needing to ping the author.

2. If the author was on the high paladin horse of valuing the craft he would not be working in such a place. Or he would be half assing slop too while concentrating on writing proper code for his own projects like most of us do when we end in bs jobs.

Re: AI Lazyslop and Personal Responsibility

#18

Post by dshacker »

dkarl wrote: post #11

I have no idea what AI changes about this scenario. It's the same scenario as when Mike did this with 1600 lines of his own code ten years ago; it just happens more often, since Mike comes up with 1600 lines of code in a day instead of in a sprint. > I don’t blame Mike, I blame the system that forced him to do this. Bending over backwards not to be the meanie is pointless. You're trying to stop him because the system…

I think people can be in hard conditions, needing a job, under pressure, burnt out and feel like this is their only way to keep their job. At least that's how it felt with Mike.

At the end, I spent a lot of time sitting down with Mike to explain this kinds of things, but I wasn't effective.

Also, now LLMs empower Mike to make a 1600 line PR daily, and me needing to distinguish between "lazyslopped" PRs or actual PRs.

Re: AI Lazyslop and Personal Responsibility

#19

Post by dkarl »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #3

> Then, I’d get a ping from his manager asking on why am I blocking the review. If you are in a culture like this, you may as well just ship slop. Management wants to break stuff, that is on them.

I've received questions like this from very good, very reasonable, very technically carefully managers. What happens is, Mike complains and tries to throw you under the bus, and the manager reaches out to hear your side of it. You tell them Mike is trying to ship code with a bunch of issues and no tests, and they go back to Mike and tell him that he's the problem and he needs to meet the technical standards enforced by the rest of the team.

Just because management asks doesn't mean they're siding with Mike.

Re: AI Lazyslop and Personal Responsibility

#20

Post by OptionOfT »

dmmartins wrote: post #15

> What was your thought process using AI? > Share your prompts! Share your process! It helps me understand your rationale. why? does it matter? do you ask the same questions for people that don't use AI? I don't like using AI for code because I don't like the code it generates and having to go over and over until I like it, but I don't care how people write code. I review the code that's on the PR and if there's I do…

Because when your code is handwritten, it's supposed to be a translation of you parsing business requirements to code.

Using AI adds a non-deterministic layer in between, and a lot of code now is there that you probably didn't need.

The prompt is helpful to figure out what is needed and what isn't.

Post reply on HN