when every company that has used AI assisted coding is forced to publish their source code

I guarantee you that will never happen. In the US? Do you live here? You think tech billionaires would ever suffer that kind of consequence?

Kent Overstreet

There are still various incompatibilities between the two, and it becomes relevant if you need to work with any organization that has standardized on Docker-specific tooling.

What exactly is your problem with Docker? It’s open source.

Also closed-source container images exist.

I don’t regret the times I show anger at work, but it’s a definitely a fine line that can leave me feeling a bit uneasy afterwards. It’s one of the “social capital” things; you need to earn enough good will to spend your anger on the battles that really matter to you.

Why would you want your entire home folder in syncthing?

And by the fact of the longest part of programming being digesting code you didn’t write, in effect you’ve taken a long-cut and could have written it yourself faster.

The conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise. Just because an LLM may need to tweak something doesn’t mean it necessarily would have been faster to do it manually. Humans need to tweak things all the time, it’s called revising, and it’s an important part of improving code.

But I wouldn’t claim that using LLMs is always faster than coding manually, nor the opposite. There are times when LLMs do slow me down. It’s important to recognize when that risk is high.

But I’m quite certain that for prototyping specifically, i.e. building a desired UX to get a feel for it and experiment with whether the ideas are sound, LLMs are faster.

So you don’t get a valid answer, you just get a convincing one.

That’s why you shouldn’t trust an LLM’s reasoning; it doesn’t actually have sound reasoning abilities. You shouldn’t rely on an LLM to reason about problems, you should use it to generate code quickly when the reasoning has either already been done by a human and/or it exists in its training set. LLMs are closer to a search engine than a problem solver.

When asking the person why they did it…

I see no reason why this process is mutually exclusive with using an LLM. You can use both human reasoning and LLM code generation.

No disagreement from me about trivial changes. I make them in my editor all the time, assuming I even have an editor in front of me. Sometimes I don’t, and it’s possible to use dictation to an LLM to make trivial changes without touching a keyboard.

That means that reviews of LLM outputted code by their nature are either invalid and/or non-optimal.

Not convincing. I’ve given my reasons

Again, no one suggested that I would prototype with the LLM and then completely trust what it tells me about the code and what it learned from writing it. That is stupid.

You get the LLM to write code quickly and then you review it and perform experiments manually.

What you did not create, you have not understood.

So just because I didn’t write a book means I could never understand it from reading it? Are editors useless in the world of book publishing? Then what is the point of code review?

You act as if my LLM-assisted prototyping implies I made no decisions and didn’t read any code. That’s obviously a terrible way to use LLMs.

In the case of Rust, it makes sense both as a UX win and a way to abstract certain requirements of the build system. Languages don’t agree on how to do things like linking packages into a binary or versioning packages. If Rust left all of that unspecified, we’d probably have multiple competing package managers and ecosystems.

I thought Bazel was just a build system, not a package manager.

Not always. Prototyping can be valuable in many circumstances when you don’t know the shape you’d like the code to take. Sometimes you need to try something before you know if it’s right. I’d rather throw away prototype code written by an LLM than code I had to write the hard way.

I don’t think it’s very hard to understand. It reduces the up-front cost of development.

That is the point. By making smaller PRs, you inevitably end up with dependencies between them. So you’d like to stack them.

No because your code is shit; you would be helping us reach singularity faster.

If you identify with this post and you are in a manager position, please heed my warning. Throw away your prototypes. Stop vibing “quick fixes to unblock me”. Stop trying to help your devs because you think you’re superman now. You are only pissing everyone off, I promise. The devs who didn’t stop coding while you were off doing important manager/product stuff are the ones who understand what’s best for the codebase. And yes, they also know how to use LLMs.

Just because you feel like you have a new superpower doesn’t mean that everyone needs to be saved. Follow the damn engineering process.

What’s their op ex though? I feel like there must be a sizable portion of that which isn’t actually necessary to keep the service up.

Seriously. If Google really wants to shove ads down our throats, they could at least regulate them so they’re not constantly horny scams. But that would cost them money, oh the humanity.

A mix of gpt-5.5 and claude opus 4.7, wrapped in my own mobile web UI that doubles as planning software and document editor.

The reason for the mobile focus is I’ve been trying to detach from my home office as much as possible, meaning I do a lot of up-front planning via ADRs and task/story writing, then I spawn agents to actually work on coding tasks. The only part that really requires sitting at a desk is code review, manual testing, and deeper human-in-the-loop coding or debugging sessions.

If you are able to max out the $100/mo plans from either OpenAI or Anthropic, then that is already a very cost-effective option.

You should file an issue.