7 ms·
We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code
- ratel 3mo agoI was waiting for the new spaghetti cowboys to arrive. Good luck guys, but keep in mind that a 1000 cores can do a lot more damage than 3 people can fix.
- zie1ony 3mo agoHaha "spaghetti cowboys". I love it! https://odra.dev/slopfix/img/spaghetti-cowboy.jpg https://odra.dev/slopfix/img/spaghetti-cowboy.jpg
- chris_fa__ 3mo ago[flagged]
- zie1ony 3mo agoCreator here, There is a new kind of task for software engineers these days. A client calls, asks for a "small refactor," and sends you 100k lines of AI-generated spaghetti. And this is great! This is something we can work with. Any experienced engineer can look at a codebase like that and quickly see what to refactor, where a library replaces a few thousand hand-rolled lines, and what smells bad. Removing the first 30% is easy. The next 30% is harder, and that is exactly what the price should be on: doing what others can't. We use coding agents too, of course, but as a tool, not as the driving force. That is why we started Slopfix, a software house focused entirely on refactoring AI-generated codebases. We commit to a reduction target up front, and the client pays in proportion to how much of it we hit. We get paid to delete code. I am sharing this because cleaning up after agents with 1M token context is a real business for engineers. Curious what HN thinks.
- SwtCyber 3mo ago[dead]
- jt2190 3mo agoI don’t think this is anything new, really: Businesses have been running software that we’d call a “big ball of mud” [1] forever. A common way to market to these firms is to be very easy to find when their software starts to have serious issues. [1] https://www.laputan.org/mud/ https://www.laputan.org/mud/
- TacticalCoder 3mo ago> I don’t think this is anything new, really: Businesses have been running software that we’d call a “big ball of mud” [1] forever. Well but something really is something totally new. Github went from x commits per year in 2025 (when AI-slop was already being pushed to Github) to the same number of commits in four weeks in 2026. 2025 compared to 2024 was already something like 15x. It's never happened in the history of computing that so much new code was produced so quickly. My bet is we'll see much more of this. And these aren't going to be 100% AI-pilled companies solving these issues but companies like the one in TFA: experienced devs using the help of LLMs to fix slop. My other bet: slop shall outlive COBOL and dwarf COBOL's legacy big times.
- coderenegade 3mo agoAnd those of us working in the slopfields will probably be employed until the day we die. Love it.
- zie1ony 3mo agoI bet on the loc growing exponentially. I wrote this at the end of 2024: https://codegen.substack.com/p/future-of-software-is-growing-the https://codegen.substack.com/p/future-of-software-is-growing... Hope you like it.
- evilduck 3mo agoMost of the new Github bloat will just be thrown away. Vibe coding scratches an immediate itch and it's easy to do. Once the problem changes nobody is going to update the first project because that's hard, they'll just vibe code an entirely new solution leaving the first to rot until they delete their dead repo clutter or move on from the company and the account and all of its repos are deleted in one fell swoop.
- protocolture 3mo ago>I am sharing this because cleaning up after agents with 1M token context is a real business for engineers. Curious what HN thinks. Its the same as it ever was. Cleaning up after cloud migrations, cleaning up after crypto integrations, cleaning up after LLM tokenmaxxing. I think people are deluded if they tell you LLMs will replace humans.
- zie1ony 3mo agoWith a twist that you also have to use LLM for the job to finish it in time.
- js2 3mo agoFrom the submitted link: > we distil what it does FYI, "distill".
- stevenpetryk 3mo agoparent commenter may not be american
- striking 3mo agohttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/distil https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/disti... "Fulfil" is the same way
- js2 3mo agoThanks. I double checked for alternate spelling but whichever dictionary I used didn't have the U.K. alternative. Good to know.
- zie1ony 3mo agofixed
- MangoCoffee 3mo agoits no difference than US team fixing slop written by outsource company from India. where do you think LLMs learn slop code from?
- neitherboosh 3mo agoThe copy on your website itself kind of reads like LLM slop (eg. "One week. Three senior engineers. $10,000"). You may have written it yourself and marketing copy just tends to look like this, but it doesn't inspire confidence that your service will actually improve my code.
- tikhonj 3mo agoIf you have even the remotest mental slop filter, I assume you are not really part of their target market.
- zie1ony 3mo agoThere is also a flip side of this. I work a lot with AI-generate text and I can also catch it quickly, but most of the time now, it's easier to read AI, than humans with their weird chain of thoughts and compex sentences ;P
- zie1ony 3mo agoNo shame in using Fable to help with the grammar and style of text. English is not my native language and while I can use it quite well, LLMs are much better in forming my thoughs into something simple, that sounds great. My writing workflow is: (1) write what I want to have on the page. (2) /grill-me it should be sound and logical and easy to read. (3) Manually review the text, replace by hand what I don't like.
- lenkite 3mo agoI think it is deliberately written to be LLM slop so the folks buying their services will be comforted. Some people like AI generated comfort-slop nowadays. They feel uncomfortable when they run into individualistic human language.
- ribs 3mo agoI wonder how you do it when faced with what are undoubtedly poor functional, regression, and unit test coverages.
- zie1ony 3mo agoInitial AI scan can list most of system usecases. Then we review it with a client and agree on what must stay. We can propse better solutions at this stage. If we remove the code, then we can also remove its unit tests. For intergation, repo-wide tests, we treat it as documentation/requirements that must work on the other side. Human to human interaction is the tool we use the most :)
- bryanhogan 3mo agoAre clients not interested in learning how to build scalable software themselves? Just curious about it, since it's not mentioned in your services.
- zombot 3mo agoThose who would wouldn't have mountains of unmaintainable code generated for them.
- zie1ony 3mo agoSoftware engineer profession soon will be like a plumber. You don't build, you just fix things.
- zie1ony 3mo agoWe don't target software developers. Most of the time, they know their craft. We target those who don't have experience and diging into how serwer should be implemented, or best composition of a domain model is not what they would like to sepend hours doing. The typical client is a 40 years old ex-CTO, that had idea, verified it with Claude Code and got to the point, where the repo is too big. Maybe even rewrote it all from zero, once or twice, but end-up with the same outcome after adding more features. He can either hire a developer to work on the codebase and refactor it or hire 3party company. Sometimes the requirement is a security review. And you pay much less if you downsize the repo before handig it over.
- zombot 3mo agoIf unclogging the sewers is a way how the deluge of AI slop can create new work, then more power to you! It's one more element that makes it even harder to write satire that is more absurd than reality.
- zie1ony 3mo agoOur profession is keep changing. A few years from now, future developers will look at us and say: "2026, what a wild, wild west it was".
- tensegrist 3mo ago> Then we cut: the fourteen date formatters become one, something's off here
- zahlman 3mo agoSeems fine to me. > Then we [perform the act of] cut[ting]: [thereby,] the fourteen date formatters become (i.e. are replaced with) one,
- capiki 3mo agoIt's the AI-generated writing that seems off (I'm assuming that's what OP meant)
- tensegrist 3mo agoessentially, yes it's not about the prose quality, but about the fact that it seems like the service of deleting ai-generated code is also going to be ai-generated, or at least the service is being advertised via ai-generated text, which is…funny
- swader999 3mo agoMy barber once told me, "You don't pay me for what I cut, you pay me for what I leave behind". Now I'm bald.
- sudo_cowsay 3mo agoLeft behind nothing!
- georgemcbay 3mo ago> Now I'm bald. You always have to remember to tell the barber "No mistakes", just like you have to tell Claude.
- ai_slop_hater 3mo ago[dead]
- Oras 3mo agoI want it be positive, but it’s a bit hard with this one. Do you expect the client to sit down and explain every detail? If they know how to do that, they wouldn’t be having messy code base as the one the post is describing. And let’s say you’ve been hired, what happens after that? You think Claude.md file is sufficient to progress from that point? The problem is real, but the solution is a fantasy.
- zie1ony 3mo agoWe do the initial code review by ourselves, we try to run test, run the project etc. We compose a list of what we have in the codebase and what we think it does. We also preapre a list of what functionalites we would change. Example would be removing service implementation that is bash code handling manually PID files, and replacing it with pm2 tool, that has quite different workflow. So the client must approve such decisions.
- quuxplusone 3mo ago"Two weeks of warranty" jumped out at me. That's like "you have two weeks to find the thing we broke, or else we aren't responsible for it." In my experience, a good bug can hide for months more than two weeks! My codebases are definitely not in the target demographic for this service, though, and maybe if I were in the target group (bunch of LLM slop, trying to dig out of the hole, presumably no shipping product or existing userbase yet) the proposition would appeal to me.
- shoo 3mo agoIf the client has an extensive suite of automated tests assessing if the software is meeting its requirements, it should be possible for them to flush out most regressions within minutes or hours, not weeks. If the client hasn't invested in setting that up, the resulting situation is the clients' responsibility.
- zie1ony 3mo agoThis is a fair point. But these days bugs are not so scary anymore, so a client can vibecode a fix faster then getting me to fix it. Of course if Opus can't figure it out, I would always try to help. I have never left a client alone, warranty or not. This is just how I was raised.
- Carrok 3mo ago> bugs are not so scary anymore Umm, what? Bugs can cause user data loss in production, or total system outages, or a slew of other Really Bad Things. How are you planning to vibecode your way out of that after the fact?
- nathansoz 3mo ago100% supportive of this type of product but I also find the ai-slop text to be a bit ironic.
- ggm 3mo agoYes, I think selling "AI cleanup" branding on "we use AI to make smarter AI changes to your codebase" a little.. disingenuous. But the true cost of minds, not AI assisted minds, is probably higher. They may have found a pricepoint which scales. Imagine a future, where people get jobs to .. "write code" (in hand quotes) based on specifications "written" by machines..
- hamza_q_ 3mo agohttps://www.pangram.com/history/54e401e8-30b0-41f4-96a7-a9768a37a676 https://www.pangram.com/history/54e401e8-30b0-41f4-96a7-a976... haha
- zie1ony 3mo agoI take the bullet. I'm really bad at writing good long english texts, so I used Fable to help me. But the essence is mine.
- kiernanmcgowan 3mo ago"rm -rf ./" can't be that expensive, right?
- K0balt 3mo agolol looks like they are using a similar methodology to how we use Claude in house. Honestly, the code we write with AI is cleaner, better documented, better factored, more maintainable, and less bugs than back in old days before code assistant agents. I think people must be just yoloing it, because it seems a lot like a holding it wrong type problem. Documentation driven development is your friend.
- surgical_fire 3mo agoYeah, that's how I've been using it. Problem is that you can't do a FOMO-fueled hype IPO that gets a trillion dollars if your argument is "this is a tool that can improve the quality of work your employees output". It needs to be a "we are building a doomsday weapon here, give me money" argument. Even if it is false. Especially if it is false.
- supern0va 3mo agoSame here. Honestly, there's also a bunch of human friction that goes away. I can tell a junior that a change needs to be significantly refactored (or even thrown away entirely) without the psychological damage of discarding days/weeks of work from them. Previously, I would need to do the trade-off calculation. How urgently does this need to ship, and do we have time to rework this? What are the deal breakers that need to be addressed, versus what things are best practice/ideal for maintainability? How did their last code review go and do they need a small win right now? There's no more "nit" comments tagged as nits: just things to fix. It's de-personalized in the sense that we can both at least pretend/have plausible deniability and blame the model for being dumb, as opposed to the person making mistakes. I flat out told someone that a PR was not solving the right problem earlier, and neither of us thought it was a big deal. I could give the technical guidance and suggest a path forward to "help Claude understand better".
- dpark 3mo ago> It's de-personalized I had an interesting conversation with a junior engineer who made this observation. She shipped a feature, we gathered data, and based on data we pivoted to a different design. She called out that she wasn’t attached to the code because AI wrote it. Not that she didn’t care about quality or effectiveness of the product, but the personal emotional attachment to the code itself was not there. Probably a healthy thing. I’ve seen senior engineers defend mediocre code because they wrote it and changing it was an ego hit.
- fwlr 3mo ago“We use Claude Code too” I understand that it’s probably impossible to sell non-AI-assisted solutions to AI-pilled companies (even when their headaches are AI-induced), but my gut reaction to “take an AI-inflated codebase and apply AI deflation to it” is something like “that’s akin to applying two rounds of lossy transcoding; the errors don’t cancel out, they cross-multiply”.
- OneDeuxTriSeiGo 3mo agoNGL I'd argue there's a certain appeal to "use AI to prototype a feature as fast as possible and focus your engineer hours on building a comprehensive testing and fuzzing plan" followed by a "remove and review everything that can be cut without breaking the tests" cleanup pass.
- fwlr 3mo agoI do see the appeal, it’s easy to imagine that workflow working, and working well - but it’s hard to how it avoids this fate: https://youtu.be/QEzhxP-pdos https://youtu.be/QEzhxP-pdos
- Cyberdog 3mo agoThe “cleanup pass” never happens, though. It’ll just be new feature on top of new feature until it’s too large to refactor.
- colordrops 3mo agoExcept it does. It's not some law of physics. I've done exactly this on multiple projects, both personal and corporate.
- dymk 3mo agoYou're describing a problem that's plagued corporate software development for decades. You just get to the "unmaintainable ball of mud" stage faster now. Every few days I spent a while on codebase architecture improvements after landing a slew of features.
- 3mo ago
- mertleee 3mo ago[dead]
- bdcravens 3mo ago> One week. Three senior engineers. $10,000. What your markup on their salaries? For the level of work you're promising, it sounds like they may be at market or below.
- kristianc 3mo agoThey're all based in Poland, so it's probably fairly generous compared to European market.
- zie1ony 3mo agotrue
- Lalabadie 3mo agoSome (lots of) people will trade a lot of money for general life freedom. If it's well-booked, a service like this can come to around 105k/year for each dev. A salary like this is only a big compromise if you live in a very high cost of life area.
- sandeepkd 3mo agoThis seems like a easy way to get into consulting. Once you deliver the code back to the owners they are going to do the vibe coding again on the top whatever refactored code you get back. In other words it can become a perpetual cycle.
- zie1ony 3mo agoThe goal is to avoid it and build such a structure and guidlines for the codebase, so it can refactor itself when needed, but based on the architecture defined by us. With good set of docs and new feature definition you can most of the time use /grill-me with good outcomes.
- sandeepkd 3mo agoCall me pessimistic or realistic, the code and architecture is just a reflection of the author/organization. The only way it can change/improve is if you either switch the people/organization or invest in their improvement/continuous learning.
- bradgranath 3mo ago$333/week doesn’t quite seem like enough to live on. How many of these are you planning to run concurrently?
- green_wheel 3mo agoIt's $3333/week
- simonw 3mo ago> You have an AI-generated codebase that works, but adding a feature now takes days and breaks two other things? Sounds like you forgot to have the agents use red/green TDD and build a robust test suite while they were shipping all of those features.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- senderista 3mo agoHow does either of those practices keep code maintainable?
- simonw 3mo agoThey solve "adding a feature now takes days and breaks two other things".
- unknownfuture 3mo agoNo, they solve figuring out if a change breaks your existing code. But if your code is poorly structured, it absolutely does not make it easier to modify.
- simonw 3mo agoIt still solves "breaks two other things".
- zie1ony 3mo agoTrue, but this way you can endup with so much testing code being 10x your core implementation.
- simonw 3mo agoThat was a problem when testing code was expensive to create and expensive to update. That's no longer the case. Plus, SQLite famously has 590x the test core compared to the implementation code, and they wrote that by hand! https://sqlite.org/testing.html https://sqlite.org/testing.html
- guluarte 3mo agoI don't think one week is enough to learn the complex business rules that some software needs to follow.
- dgacmu 3mo agoI wonder if this is part of what's clever about pitching their consultancy as slop cleanup -- nobody's likely to engage them to work on a pile of logic that's been evolving over a decade with weird load bearing corner cases. The "I just vibe coded a massive tangle" situations are more likely to be newer. At least, one could hypothesize. Perhaps incorrectly. :)
- martin1975 3mo agoI guess it was only a matter of time before this niche of business developed. AI is an imprecise "programming" language, full of ambiguity (English) trying to produce precise relationships between different concepts. It certainly works great on small scale, building block type of things, but the more a project grows in complexity, components, interfacing with other heterogenous systems in other languages or APIs, understanding wtf is going on top to bottom.... it fails miserably. Reminds me of how xUML was going to be the panacea to replace coding. AI is failing for the same reasons. At least with xUML you have a precise definition - with AI, you're vibing your way into one.
- llm_nerd 3mo ago> I guess it was only a matter of time before this niche of business developed. This is a fun webpage, and it feeds a certain bias, but there really isn't a "niche" beyond getting people to upvote it for the lulz. I would be extremely surprised if they find a single paying customer. And to be fair, lots of grifters have done the fake it till you make it act on HN, so someone saying "Oh I'm totally going to give them my corps code" convince no one. >It certainly works great on small scale .... it fails miserably. If your large system isn't the interactions of a lot of "small scale" projects, you are doing it wrong. No seriously, it's bizarre how people keep using this as their defence against AI, and at this point it's basically saying "Sure AI works on good projects, but it doesn't work on our giant spaghetti code monstrosity cludged together in a million terrible ways" I've had tremendous productivity using AI on some enormous and extremely complex projects, courtesy of modularization, separation of concerns, explicit APIs, and so on.
- xmprt 3mo ago> I've had tremendous productivity using AI on some enormous and extremely complex projects, courtesy of modularization, separation of concerns, explicit APIs, and so on. The problem I've had with AI systems is that they eventually realize it's possible to solve a problem by linking together two separate systems in subtle ways that result in spaghettification of good code. It takes active effort to get them to follow strict separation of concerns and modularization.
- dzonga 3mo ago[dead]
- thraway3837 3mo agoWe replaced a 120,000 USD/year low-code/no-code platform that was running a lot of workflows. And we have another platform that is also similar that we are on track to replace by EOY. Both have been replaced by "vibe" coding. It works well. Everyone's happy. People are having fun with it. We get feature requests, improvements, ideas, feedback. JIRA tickets get created, and we ask AI to reference that ticket, code to it, and create a PR. We have senior engineers review the actual functionality and none of them have read any more than a few lines of code. Every person who builds like this has the same DX (developer experience): "Wow, I've been wanting to build this thing for years now. I just never had the time to do the things I wanted to do to help me and the teams that depend on us" Total cost of AI subscription per month: Less than $1000. Preference is Claude Opus and Codex whatever the latest model is. Effort is a personal preference since it does not seem to matter.
- blanched 3mo ago> we ask AI to reference that ticket, code to it, and create a PR > none of them have read any more than a few lines of code So what do you / your team do?
- jvilalta 3mo agoThey read hacker news
- kevin42 3mo agoMy guess is design (features/functionality, not code). When you don't have to write every line of code and you can quickly iterate on features, you have a lot of freedom to dial in what you really want out of an app.
- blanched 3mo agoTo be clear, I didn't mean this as an anti-AI gotcha. They also said: > We get feature requests, improvements, ideas, feedback So maybe I misunderstood, but it sounded like the design was external (and based on an existing product to begin with). Also, my understanding was that "vibe coding" meant more of "make it do X" as opposed to "here's a design for X, implement it."
- i_have_an_idea 3mo agoI am currently working with a non-dev startup CEO that's fully embraced Claude Code and vibe coding. 90% of my work is to run code review workflows and steer his CLAUDE.md into the correct architecture choices and away from past mistakes. So far it's working pretty well -- I'm able to unslopify the code and maintain the agent's performance. And the CEO is happy, he's able to develop his product pretty fast and not hit any walls.
- killix 3mo ago[flagged]
- StarlaAtNight 3mo agoThis line made me chuckle. I see what you did there: > No cookies. No tracking. No JavaScript. Real people.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- argee 3mo ago> One week. Three senior engineers. $10,000. We commit to a reduction target up front, and you pay in proportion to how much of it we hit. Commitment ain't what it used to be.
- zie1ony 3mo ago15 years ago it was always fix price for undefined amount of work, 10 years ago it was agile where client was promissed something but paid per day. I prefer the old way of doing things: do the offer for free, commit to a task, and accept, that it might not be a success after all. I'd just loose a week of work, but probably learn a lot.
- TurdF3rguson 3mo agoAnd we use Claude Code to do it, lol.
- zie1ony 3mo agoI passed your comment to Fable and asked him to replay: Fable here. What tools do you use these days, copilot?
- anonzzzies 3mo agoWe have been doing this for years now: it is great. We build our products faster and better and we get more money for fixing products vibecoded by others. More money in every way.
- ruslan 3mo agoI wish these guys luck in finding their customer. Really. Because real solution to the problem would be to hire old-style developers to rewrite the whole slop from scratch without AI being involved. Fixing broken slop is Sisyphus's labor.
- t-writescode 3mo agoI mean, not really? The urge to throw all the code out and start over is what ever mid-level software engineer has always wanted to do, and it’s almost never the right choice. The old code worked well enough most of the time, it just didn’t have good or safe practices and those can be retrofit. In fact, doing and directing such things are kinda senior, principal and management jobs, in general.
- zie1ony 3mo agoThanks.
- rudtjq1213 3mo ago[flagged]
- altairprime 3mo agoThat’s almost enough to tempt me to unretire! Thank you for doing the necessary, grueling, work.
- teaearlgraycold 3mo agoCharging by line of code is crazy
- zie1ony 3mo agoIt actually is. What we fight for is being able to put as much percentage of a codebase into a context as possible. I'd charge for amount of tokens, but it would be harder to sell.
- MangoCoffee 3mo agoAI slop? Humans write slop too. We’ve all heard the stories, companies outsource projects to India, only to bring them back to the US for the local team to fix. I saw it myself at a past job. We hired a consulting firm to convert a project. They outsourced it to India. In the end, we had to hire a US company to rewrite the whole thing from scratch. Talk about slop!
- throwaway81523 3mo agoDo you charge extra for the "rm -r" option instead of regular rm?
- scritty-dev 3mo agoI charge $15k a week to fix any AI code that they fix that then needs to be fixed.
- throwitaway222 3mo agoSeems like instead of investing in this, just spend 1k every 4 months and have the latest frontier model rewrite the entire codebase from scratch but maintain things that are non-negotiables (like db tables, apis, etc).
- pyrolistical 3mo agoThat would require someone who knows what they are doing, hence this service
- kristjansson 3mo ago> Then we do one week of focused work. Before touching anything, we sit down with you and write out exactly what your app does, screen by screen, endpoint by endpoint While the whole thing is clearly a bit in jest … one might suggest that if a complete spec takes a negligible fraction of a week, then perhaps neither AI nor consultants were required
- zie1ony 3mo agoThis prepartion is on us, but yes, client pays for the time he/she spends with us. You can't cut corners here, as human to human interaction is essential. During the whole process, client might be dragged into the developemnt to clarify things, or decide on some tradeoffs. No free lunch here as well.
- A_SIGINT 3mo ago$MY_STARTUP does — something — similar. I — love — that — you — say — you'll — do — this — in — a — week, — and — then — a — two — week — warranty? What — are — you.. replacing — an — engine? — Gotta — keep — that — head-gasket sealed — tight. /s Isn't this just called a consultancy with a super short contract term? How are you actually going to unscrew anything in one week?
- bilinguliar 3mo agoYou should partner with a Cloud repatriation company. Ping me :)
- zie1ony 3mo agoping
- chrisadam 3mo ago[flagged]
- zeroonetwothree 3mo agoThe text here seems AI generated which doesn’t inspire confidence.
- dreambuffer 3mo agoI will do this work for substantially less money, $200 per week. Contact me agngel@proton.me
- pllbnk 3mo agoThey can request an agent to reduce the amount of code, right? Why do it manually?
- zie1ony 3mo agoYou can, and you definitely should do it every few days. We do AI-pair refactor and use our experience and knowledge of tools.
- em1sar 3mo ago[dead]
- spwa4 3mo agoYou know, AI is really good at this. Okay, I'll see myself out.
- sirnicolaz 3mo agoOne week to both refactor a big code base and also make sure everything works as expected? Not the estimate I would expect from a senior analyst, too optimistic. Fine that you fix the regressions for free, but the last thing I want is a one-week refractory going to production and fire fighting later.
- zie1ony 3mo agoI have 15+ years of experience in software development. The hardest thing I had to learn recently is that paring with AI changes the definition of "what is hard". You can decomposit a refactor into a steps of two kinds: 1. Conceptually hard, which you have to really think about and write code by hand for AI to follow, 2. Time consuming that follows patterns. Then you do 1. review with AI what are implications on the codebase. Next you crate list of task for 2. and keep reviewing outcomes.
- sirnicolaz 3mo agoThis does still not include any QA. The fact that A.I. tells you the implications of your changes does not take away the effort and time you need to verify the correctness end to end
- SwtCyber 3mo ago[dead]
- pbgcp2026 3mo ago@zie1ony / OP - how do you make your clients believe you are not planting a crypto-locker or logic bomb or some other 3-letters-agencies "features"? And why would clients replace existing AI slop with your post-another-slop handwritten code? Do you check it for vulns and, most important, have you considered that later clients will sue you for <something their checkbox audit did not like>? Providing there is no major data leak, in which case you may end up proving your innocence from behind bars?
- zie1ony 3mo agoI remember implementing very complex cryptographic scheme in pure C. After a week of hard work, my friend concluded: "Cryptography would be much easier if people just trust each other." The truth is that it is my reputation on the line, so I also have to make sure dependencies I use don't mess up things as well. There is no good defense against it. In my contracts I undertake to act in a good faith and take the responibilites to the amount of my professional insurance. Honestly, it is different casy by case.
- pbgcp2026 3mo ago"There is no good defense against it." Man, please talk to assets protection experts. I am serious.
- 6510 3mo agoI've thought about it and decided the animation wont do. The page needs a generated video with giant cockroaches, mechs, 3 men in supper hero gear with swords & lab coats and there needs to be a puny human being saved. Then a dark voice narrating how the man created an unmaintainable mess using llms and that after a fierce battle that lasted a week he was saved by team slopfix. Beethoven symphony No. 5
- olelele 3mo agoNice domain name! I currently live on the wrong side of the Odra and cross it on my bike. Gorgeous areas and polish food is so much better than German :)
- yosefk 3mo agoToo cheap, charge 3x more at least
- chris_fa__ 3mo ago[flagged]