That's okay. Reviewing the code will become the agents' job as well.

A couple more step functions in model capability of the type we've seen in the past year, and there will pretty much be no reason for humans to be involved in the development process at all. All humans would need to do is communicate clearly what needs to be made and flag problems as they come up.

▲

weatherlite 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> All humans would need to do is communicate clearly what needs to be made and flag problems as they come up.

Kinda what i'm doing already, but for the young startup I'm at that's surprisingly tons of work. I miss the days we wrote code by hand boy those were fun 8.5 hours workdays.

▲

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

> All humans would need to do is communicate clearly what needs to be made and flag problems as they come up.

Sounds like the easiest thing in the world: I wonder why did we not think of it earlier?

▲

xpct 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"A couple more step functions" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here

▲

pydry 3 hours ago | parent [-]

It's the AI bro's mantra.

It didnt go wrong

And if it did, it was because you werent using the latest model.

And if you were, it was because you didnt have the appropriate guardrails.

And if you did, it's because you didnt have AGENTS.MD.

And if you did, it's because you didnt prompt it properly.

And if you did, it you're still going to be redundant soon because I'm sure the next model released will fix whatever went wrong.

	▲	mywittyname 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I've stopped calling out Claude mistakes on team meetings because this is so true. I mean, sure, I could have predicted in what ways an LLM would fuck up, but there's just so many ways I can't keep up. We just had a major production issue because someone's LLM wrote queries against dev databases. Which are very obviously dev databases because they are labelled with dev in the name, and in the table descriptions. AI reviewer didn't catch it, neither did the human reviewer for that matter.