At least part of the negligence is about the people who knowingly promote AI without also promoting knowledge of the limitations. Those who post stories about vibe-coding XXX in a week and don't bother to point out that they have no idea if it's not a piece of crap, waiting to explode, because there's no way they could have tested it properly in a week let alone read the mountains of code produced.

There's a hype machine working and lots of people riding on it.

▲

sajithdilshan 6 hours ago | parent [-]

That's what is meant by human negligence. There will always be a hype about something and that is not an excuse to have a devil may care attitude on any work being done

▲

t43562 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Negligence depends on what you believe to be true. If you're being told "this is possible and the AI will do it properly you don't have to worry" then it's not negligence really - on the part of the person who believes what they are told.

For the rest of us it is about being put under pressure by managers who don't understand whether to believe what you say or what they read about vibe coding on some linked-in post. As far as they are concerned you're not the authority and some hype-ster is.

▲

sajithdilshan 6 hours ago | parent [-]

> "this is possible and the AI will do it properly you don't have to worry" then it's not negligence really

Then that's lack of due diligence and and any manager is forcing you to ignore that, you should report them to compliance team. You cannot blame everyone else and bear no responsibility for your actions. If you decide to vibe code blindly and ignore all the laws and standards, then that was your decision and you decided to turn a blind eye.

	▲	t43562 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Management know how to keep themselves safe! They watch your AI usage and pressure you to use more. They tell you that "of course you must check the code" but of course if you do then they can start telling you your performance isn't good enough. "Fred is much faster than you" and of course Fred says he checks everything but does he really? To do code reviews he just uses an AI anyhow so nobody catches what the AI doesn't catch. If you check his code carefully in a review and bring up a lot of questions (which he cannot answer because he doesn't know) then you're being "difficult" and dragging the team down. Is this what I'm experiencing now? perhaps about 70% of it but I can see how it goes. There are lots of companies out there with poor development practices who think that AI will save them. They don't want to prioritise "quality" although they shout about this a lot. They think that somehow they don't deserve to have quality issues if they prioritise speed and features and don't bother to fix any problem until it causes downtime. Please forgive my cynical view. I have simply had some bad experiences. It's not always easy to do what is right even when it's fully in the company's own best interest.