I remember back in the pre-2023 days where SonarQube was a big deal for Java static analysis, and I let it rip across an entire 120k line project at one point upon which it found something like seven issues, out of which only one or two were actual bugs. It was almost entirely useless. I think even Qwen would've done leagues better today.

Most bugs are far too nuanced to be caught by static analysis imo, you do need to actually understand what's going on in the program, the intent, the environment, etc. instead of blindly verifying if everything technically checks out, compilers already do a perfect job at that.

I find this attitude really weird. I just checked and I have 8,793 miles driven on my car and of that I'd say ~8750 of them were done by fsd (self driving). These days most of my interventions are to pick a different parking spot, and I can't remember the last time I had a serious disengagement, it's always just me wanting to drive a different route, park in a different location, or sometimes to handle things like car washes and the like.

For me, for all intents and purposes, self driving is here today.

You're being sarcastic, but I do enjoy it. I just took a Waymo recently and it was thrilling, it felt great to feel the wind and the sun, listen to music, and get where I was going without having to drive there. I still like driving, obviously, but being able to decide one or the other is wonderful.

I'm a bit more pessimistic.

> In ten years we'll be drowning in subtle bugs introduced by the unreliable garbage that is machine-generated code

Yes. But replace

> and the industry will hopefully have learned to never rely on anything that wasn't at least seriously looked over by an actual thinking human being that understands it.

with: "and the industry will throw even more LLMs at the problem, producing an even deeper soup of garbage that in some cases perform a tiny bit better, and when things do break it's always the fault of someone else. So for example a bank denies you a mortgage or an insurance company fails to process your claim, and you are almost certain that it's due to some slopcode somewhere, but you have to suck it up because the world has become accustomed that this is just how things are done."

It's a way of breaking computers that I'd never thought I'd see. We're wilfully taking the one cool thing about computers – them exactly interpreting instructions carefully crafted by humans to do exactly the right thing – with bucketloads of vibes that hopefully mostly do the right thing most of the time ("the tests pass"). What the hell are we doing.