People keep assuring me that LLMs writing code is a revolution, that as long as we maintain sound engineering practices and tight code review they're actually extruding code fit for purpose in a fraction of the time it would take a human.

And every damned time, every damned time any of that code surfaces, like Anthropic's flagship offering just did, somehow it's exactly the pile of steaming technical debt and fifteen year old Stack Overflow snippets we were assured your careful oversight made sure it isn't.

Can someone please explain this to me? Is everyone but you simply prompting it wrong?

It's a good thing programmers aren't susceptible to hubris in any way, or this would have been so much worse.

This is peak malicious compliance and I love it

https://sightlessscribbles.com/posts/the-paperwork-flood/

Edit : the blog author is on the fediverse if you want to follow him here, and he maintains a follow page on his site with many options!

Brutal.

When Microsoft acquired GitHub.

Audre Lorde's "master's tools" speech was not about tech platforms. So why does tech discourse keep citing it as if it were? I write about what happens when a Black feminist theorist's words get borrowed, stripped of context, and made to do work they were never meant to do.

https://tarakiyee.com/on-the-enshittification-of-audre-lorde-the-masters-tools-in-tech-discourse/ #enshittification #AudreLorde #techpolicy

Are we having fun yet?

https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.28627