I'm not surprised to see reports like this for open source projects where the bar for contributing is relatively low, but am surprised to see it in the workplace. You'd imagine that devs like that would be filtered out via the hiring process...

I'm a coding tutor and the most frustrating part of my job is when my students use LLM generated code. They have no clue what the code does (or even what libraries they're using) and just care about the pretty output. Whenever I try asking them questions about the code one of them responded verbatim "I dunno" and continued prompting ChatGPT (I ditched that student afterward). Something like Warp where the expectation is to not even interact with the terminal is equally bad as far as I'm concerned since students won't have any incentive to understand what's under the hood of their GUIs.

To be clear, I don't mind people using LLMs to code (I use them to code my SaaS project) but what I do mind is them not even trying to understand wtf is on their screen. This new breed of vibe coders are going to be close to useless in real world programming jobs which when combined with the push targeted at kids that "coding is the future" is going to result in a bunch of below mediocre devs both flooding the market and struggling to find employment.

> You'd imagine that devs like that would be filtered out via the hiring process...

...except when the C-suite is pressuring the entire org to use AI tools. Then these people are blessed as the next generation of coders.

Same, I use LLMs to figure out the correct options to pass in the AZ or the AWS CLI, or some low-key things. I still code on my own.

But our management has drunk the Kool Aid and has now everybody obliged to use Copilot or other LLM assists.