3 ms·
> It’s really, really easy to get a better code sample than the one shown here. The problem is that in a team setting, you can't control the type of "code samp
by deivid 1y ago
> It’s really, really easy to get a better code sample than the one shown here.
The problem is that in a team setting, you can't control the type of "code sample" that your teammates send for review.
It's frequently the case that some teammates will request review for this kind of slop, while outsourcing all the "thinking" to the reviewer.
As a revwiewer, I now have to review much more code (LLMs absolutely increase the amount of code per hour you can put out), which is often unfiltered LLM output, so it needs more careful and thorough review.
Essentially, a careless developer with access to an LLM can now perform a cheap DoS on reviewers.
- imiric 1y ago> Essentially, a careless developer with access to an LLM can now perform a cheap DoS on reviewers. Exactly. And not just a careless developer, but one intentionally doing so. Recently [this project][1] made it to the front page and amassed quite a few upvotes, positive feedback, and GitHub stars. Yet anyone giving it a cursory look would be able to tell that it's AI-generated slop, that is completely unnecessary at best, and possible malware at worst. Not only that, but the author[2] fired off several AI slop PRs to popular projects in a single day (May 12th), which is exactly the cheap DoS you mention. The author of cURL wrote about AI-generated bogus security reports last year[3], and the work they add to open source maintainers who are already stretched thin. So this is a real problem that most AI proponents are ignoring. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44009321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44009321 [2]: https://github.com/dipampaul17 https://github.com/dipampaul17 [3]: https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2024/01/02/the-i-in-llm-stands-for-intelligence/ https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2024/01/02/the-i-in-llm-stands-f...