shot, chaser
@hailey so he did not, in fact, know what he was doing.
@gsuberland @hailey “the author of this library may possibly have been coding based on vibes as it turns out”

@s0 @gsuberland @hailey

He didn't know what he wasn't doing because knowing what he should have been doing made him think he knew what he was doing.

Why you would start a project with possibly error-riddled initial state and then iterate with possibly error-riddled improvements I don't know.

@SorceryForEva @s0 @gsuberland @hailey that's been my biggest objection to using AI as a coding agent for quite a while now.

Personally, I find writing my own code easier and less stressful than debugging others' code.

Similarly, I'd MUCH rather drive my own (sigh) Tesla than "supervise" the idiot Autopilot driving my (sigh) Tesla.

@hailey i don't mind the job security but there probably should be a company policy to not utilize LLM-generated code in the first place
@hailey at least the author admitted that he fucked up lmao
@ity @hailey so best, best, unrealistically best case scenario, the AI more or less mostly works when under the micromanagement of the kind of person who is willing to publicly admit their own mistakes...
@hailey Ask an AI to play stupid games. And strangely it's not the AI that wins stupid prizes.

@hailey @dalias

“But all the tests pass!!”

@inthehands @hailey @dalias Ah, but who wrote the tests? 🤔

@erik @hailey @dalias

Doesn’t matter, you just have to write good tests to test the test-writer, •then• everything is guaranteed correct

@inthehands @erik @hailey @dalias "you just" could solve a lot of problems, unfortunately no-one "just"

@brezelradar
Indeed, though in this case, “you just” is a joke; it very much cannot solve the problem. The post is satire of people who think that tests guarantee code correctness.

It’s analogous to saying you can make a turtle fly by putting it on the back of another turtle that can already fly. “And how does •that• turtle fly?” “It’s turtles all the way down!”

@inthehands I see. 😀👍

My irony/satire/sarcasm detector is kinda on the fritz since around 2019 when all those lunatics went totally bonkers.

> It’s analogous to saying you can make a turtle fly by putting it on the back of another turtle that can already fly. “And how does •that• turtle fly?” “It’s turtles all the way down!”

That's how recursion works, right? Or was it induction 🤔

@brezelradar
Induction! If you decide you don’t need a base case, then with induction you can prove anything!
@hailey let’s be clear: this is 100% the kind of thing that happens when we do a full rewrite. It’s just that LLM’s make doing a full rewrite much less expensive, so people are going to do it more often.

@unsaturated @hailey The part that is slightly surprising is that this happened despite the claim that "I was trying to validate my skepticism".

It's not like the red team gets a magic bonus to competence; but wanting to find fault should, at least, make you less likely to be misled by something looking pretty competent overall; where someone who is basically skimming to see if the new guy is a loser or not would be more likely to see that it's basically workmanlike and relax.

@hailey “the code actually looked pretty good;” therefore, it must be correct—I trust it. Nice…
@hailey smh I'd thought Kenton was smarter than that. Sad
Wait a minute. How did this happen? We’re smarter than this. Apparently Not

YouTube
@hailey code review is harder than code authoring
@hailey In general I concur that LLMs are not how we're going to be writing code in the next N years, but in defense of the library and its author, OAuth is a hot mess of a spec and it's an easy mistake to make even if you're hand-coding the thing.
@hailey is it just me or is the highlighted sentence a really weird thing to write, even under the circumstances?
@hailey like it kind of goes without saying that somebody could miss something for reasons other than that they've never heard of the concept before; why does somebody decide this belongs in the literal description of a CVE

@rakslice @hailey

Perhaps simply as a warning to the others who may follow in his footsteps.

@rakslice @hailey It's psychology. If you feel shame for something you did, you try to hide it. One common way is to claim exactly the opposite of what you did. But this often just attracts attention to the fact you are trying to hide. Been there, done that.
🤷
@hailey Can't review code that is missing lol
@hailey with such a vibe in the readme the vibed code midnight not resist the real life vibrations

@hailey
and what an odd way to deflect. this developer knows that criticism will first go to the fact that they used AI (because, of course) so they get out in front of it by saying "its not the AI's fault! its all me! im the stupid one!"

its all becoming very ideological, this AI coding stuff. you can see the more fervent defenders doing goofy stuff like this and sacrificing themselves for the AI models they use. its all very odd to me. why not just have fun coding?

@hailey they're vibe coding and the vibes are rancid

@hailey Yes. That's what I keep saying at work. If it can be used wrong, it will.

Even if you tell people how to use it right, at best they'll do it for a while and then use it wrong. And even if they think they're using it right, eventually they'll use it wrong.

That's what I hate most I think. It's insidious and misleading as fuck, and it keeps tricking otherwise perfectly sensible and intelligent people into courses of action they would never have followed otherwise.

(The last phrase is probably a big selling point for the truly evil actors.)

@hailey I expected better from @cloudflare.

@hailey

If only someone... ANYONE... had warned that "lazy coding" would (also) lead to "fucking shit up" because you lose familiarity with "the basic concepts of 'how the thing is supposed to work'" when you're no longer 'doing it for yourself'

I think Reddit is going to need some sort of "EloiFacesEatenByMorlocks" subreddit for this in the near future

@hailey what a time to be alive