> We're all Linus Torvalds now. We review, we merge, we send back. And if you had no idea what you were doing before, you'll still have no idea what you're doing today. You just fat-finger less typos today than ever before.

Except Linus understands the code that is being reviewed / merged in since he already built the kernel and git by hand. You only see him vibe-coding toys but not vibe-coding in the kernel.

Today, we are going to see a gradual skill atrophy with developers over-relying on AI and once something like Claude goes down, they can't do any work at all.

The most accurate representation is that AI is going to rapidly make lots of so-called 'senior engineers' who are over-reliant and unable to detect bad AI code like juniors and interns.

▲

raw_anon_1111 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

My “skill” for 40 years has been to turn what I wanted my computer to do into code to get it done using the tools available to me. A “senior developer” is not someone who “codez real gud”. It’s someone who can work at a higher level of scope and ambiguity and has a larger impact on the organization than a ticket taker

▲

keyle 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If you can't rebuke code today. You can't rebuke code tomorrow.

▲

tmtvl 3 hours ago | parent [-]

By induction that means either nobody can rebuke code or someone who can rebuke code can do that from the day they're born.

	▲	d-us-vb 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		“can” has multiple meanings in English. It can express both epistemic (describing the world accurately as is) and dynamic (describing the capabilities and attributes of an object) modes. If used epistemically, then parent’s phraseology makes perfect sense since his epistemology makes no claim about an object’s variability across time.
	▲	3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]