thank you

dude, one is like 32GB and the other is 1TB, bigger number wins, take 32

also working for fortune 500 companies is extremely overrated anyway

well, it’s making some people want to make a deposit

yeah, let’s pretend people don’t post their bodies on social media for attention

Sounds like a very reasonable “fix”, equating filming people spinning on a table to upskirting a waitress serving someone is a bit weird

of course it’s a plus, imagine requiring humans with drone pilot licenses to fly them - shareholders would be so disappointed!

I can’t open imgur links, can you paste the image inline?

Gender bias aside, I don’t think the male perspective is much better

yeah, and I disagree. People have different opinions on this. A 1M LoC slop project is an extreme that is not representative of what shows up here.

the post is not about this 1M LoC project, it’s about creating a ban for whatever the mods decide it’s slop

tbf I wouldn’t recognize jennifer lopez without makeup

Let people choose what they want to see.

People here tend to call any hint of LLM use “slop”, and arguing on a threshold is a waste of everyone’s time that will end up disappointing most. Tag it and let people choose.

my ai goes to a different school, you wouldn’t know her

If only they put half the effort spent lobbying taxes, putting hurdles for space development instead, the whole world could benefit from not turning earth’s orbit into an american clusterfuck

hehe you have the word ass in your private key, what are the odds

deleted by creator

I don’t know you, but it doesn’t sound like a high standards issue to me, sounds like a lack of process. I’ve been a thorough reviewer before AI, at least thorough in the ways that mattered, not nitpicking formatting. And I’ll tell you an automated reviewer today can catch more things before I have time to confirm the first item I find. There are still false positives, but it’s still more thorough than I have time to be. Bc of that it really helps including a round of automated review before looping in a human, regardless of who/what wrote the code.

The main kind of review problems AI still struggles with are the project direction ones: “does it make sense to implement this/like this?”, “should this be a new package instead?”, and things involving tacit knowledge that often goes undocumented “last time we did this, someone had to access prod on a Sunday” - so that’s what I focus my reviews on. And the other area is if you’re writing UI code, whether it’s a web app or a game, it’ll also struggle to determine what “feels” good to use, so it’ll need a human earlier in the loop.

This kind of specification applies to the agent behavior or the agent behavior in a project. You don’t write it on every conversation, you write/review it once for the project or agent and let the harness include it on every conversation. You can even ask the agent to scan the codebase and pull desirable patterns out of it for future sessions.

The entire point of using an agent is to not have to write everything yourself, so that when you write “implement feature X”, the feature gets implemented in a way that makes sense in that project, is reviewed, refactored, and tested by agents, and it’s good enough to bring in a human reviewer.