I do think there's some real limits to code review as we do it and that we need to figure out what is next, to some degree. That's just my belief here. Orgs kee

I do think there's some real limits to code review as we do it and that we need to figure out what is next, to some degree. That's just my belief here. Orgs keeping to the past are going to be kind of miserable; leads already had a ton of responsibility for understanding it all, and it feels like that just isn't feasible to keep on with. That's a pretty bike take, but I think a bit less than what this paper is saying. A more mild sub-argument I really enjoyed recently was just that we have basically an obligation to have AI code review: > Nuclear opinion: I don’t care if you use AI to write code,¹ but making a human review a change before an LLM is disrespectful. > Why am I catching your bugs if a computer could have done it? It’s like asking to review code that doesn’t compile or pass CI. https://bsky.app/profile/filippo.abyssdomain.expert/post/3moq6sdq6xk2l https://bsky.app/profile/filippo.abyssdomain.expert/post/3mo... This makes me also really appreciate a thread that shows up recently, where folks were talking about their code/repo forges. Using tickets/PRs as rendezvous for where people and agents come together had very high appeal to me. Being able to surface discussion in a shared context seems crucial. https://btao.org/posts/2026-05-09-the-forge-we-deserve/ https://btao.org/posts/2026-05-09-the-forge-we-deserve/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48582147 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48582147