You must be replying to a different comment. Seems completely unrelated to what I wrote. I never claimed that there wasn't AI slop. My point is that there are different levels of code coming out of AI, both due to the quality of the model and harness, and the quality of the engineer that is driving it. Thus you can't just bucket all AI developed code the same.

100% there is slop created by humans and really solid code bases generated by AI driven by a meticulous developer. You are making the exact error I was addressing, which is bucketing all AI code as the same.

I quote-replied to your comment, so I doubt it was unrelated.

> I never claimed that there wasn't AI slop

No, but you implied that a top tier dev doesn't produce slop when using AI.

> If you have a black box that spits out code, and you are unable to distinguish the quality between a top tier dev and an AI inside the black box

My point was that "if" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here and you're coming very close to begging the question.

> bucketing all AI code as the same.

Most people are not "top tier devs" and over time this will probably become more true. Even if I accepted your premise that "top tier devs" only generate solid code bases with AI, the ease of entry and the ease of spitting out thousands of lines of code means the ratio of bad AI to good AI will not go in a good direction unless it becomes too expensive for non "top tier devs" to use. Given this, I think it's fair to assume AI code is low quality until proven otherwise.