[dead]
Verification debt: the hidden cost of AI-generated code
101–103 of 103 posts
Re: Verification debt: the hidden cost of AI-generated code
#102There's a related but distinct problem downstream: once the agent is running in production, verification debt shifts from code to execution. Internal logs of what the agent called and what it received are mutable — if a provider disputes delivery or compliance requires an audit trail, "we have logs" is a weak defense.
The deterministic verification (tests, linters, CI) handles the code side. The execution side is a different problem: you need immutable witnesses at call time, before the agent proceeds, not post-hoc reconstructions.
Re: Verification debt: the hidden cost of AI-generated code
#103Figuring out how to trust AI-written code faster is the project of software engineering for the next few years, IMO. We'll need to figure out the techniques and strategies that let us merge AI code sight unseen. Some ideas that have already started floating around: - Include the spec for the change in your PR and only bother reviewing that , on the assumption that the AI faithfully executed it - Lean harder on your d…
I think part of this gap is that the things we're verifying and the things we're reviewing are at different layers of abstraction. So when there's a ton more code, it takes way more mental load to review it all because engineers have to do this abstraction over a much higher volume of code. Treating the higher layer of abstraction as its own primitive that needs review isn't perfect but definitely helps... so each code diff also includes an architecture diff for example