> Ask Fable to conduct an adversarial /ultareview of their PR and send the same wall of text back to them.

This won't help. Your wall of text will just get fed right back into the LLM.

Larrikin 23 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

This is the point where you decide. It used to be low stakes and easy to care about the job you did for other people.

Do you want to put the same effort into your job when nobody else does, or should you reserve your thoughts and just feed it back into the LLM?

The LLMs are being advertised as output increasers but companies so far are using them as excuses to fire people instead of creating previously unbelievable things. It might be better to feed your coworkers output back in and use your thoughts to start the company you thought you never had time for.

▲

Jensson 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It will help if your wall of text cost less tokens than theirs, they will run out before you do if you have the same company quota per person.

▲

Telemakhos 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm not sure what the right vocabulary would be to describe this, but this sounds more like the calculations behind nuclear war than a healthy collegiality or cooperative work relationship. This sets up a competition to determine a loser based on resource scarcity, not a way to achieve mutual goals to advance the organization's goals.

▲

corndoge 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

You are thinking of "game theory" and it's what happens when your coworkers don't give a shit. And all it takes is one, both because they can degrade product quality faster than you can gate it or fix it and because the performance assessment techniques are about 3 years behind the state of LLMs and if they play, you have to also or you'll get shit on from such a height you won't even know what hit you.

And once you start playing the game, then one day - it doesn't take long - you wake up and ask yourself if this is how you want to spend 8 hours of your life monday through friday. I think a lot of us are saying no but now need to figure out where our money is going to come from. I don't have the answers.

▲

toomuchtodo an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

“Token Standoff.” The most efficient token consumer wins. This mutually assured time efficiency destruction is driven by management support of aggressive use of AI in an attempt to, in some combination, increase productive and constrain labor costs.

AI isn’t making developers more productive – it’s making them busier - https://leaddev.com/ai/ai-isnt-making-developers-more-produc... - June 11th, 2026

	▲	fallous 26 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Mutually Assured Distraction.

▲

mattas 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Also, make sure your wall of text prompts Claude to be extra verbose to really burn through that quota of theirs.

▲

3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

mysterydip 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What I don’t understand is what value is the person adding to this equation? Put another way, what’s the difference between them feeding the wall of text to the LLM, and you feeding the wall of text to the LLM, bypassing them in the process entirely?

	▲	therealdrag0 9 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Peer review, in this case, “did you use AI to review your change and address its feedback”.
	▲	Jimmc414 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The role of the person in the equation is to take personal responsibility for the proposed change and review the changes prior to PR submission. You can't put AI on a PIP. It's acceptable to use AI as a coding assistant in 2026, but if a human is not reviewing what they submit and taking responsibility, their value is on par with a ChatGPT subscription.

▲

loeg 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It helps in that it offloads the code review burden you'd otherwise be doing.

▲

rvz 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

As a last resort, do the code-review with a live pair programming session.

If they can't explain their own code then it is by default a bad pull request.

At the end of the day, everyone's time is being wasted on tokens and on the increasing cognitive complexity of AI generated code.

▲

xgulfie 2 hours ago | parent [-]

So if they say "idk Claude did it", what would you write in the PR review box?

	▲	Geezus_42 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		REJECTED: Engineer does not understand what they wrote.
	▲	CursedSilicon 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		A teammate that can't write (or at least, can't explain) "their own code" Actively drags down the morale and productivity of their team (because everyone is getting flooded with AI slop PR's) AND costs far too much money relative to everyone else doing actual work? (token usage) By god they sound like management material