There are two loud camps in agentic coding right now. I think they're both wrong.
Camp one says you need a human reviewing every line of AI-generated code before it ships. Responsible and "serious" - yet leaving reviewers increasingly swamped.
Camp two says let the agents do everything. Steve Yegge's Gas Town epitomizes this idea - 20-30 simultaneous agents with specialized roles, plus an audacious vision called "The Wasteland" that federates thousands of these teams together.
Somewhere between the swamp and the wasteland, there's a pragmatic path being paved: the human stays in the loop for every change - not wading through diffs, but charting the course. Exercising taste and judgment, and staying close enough to the ground to sense when things start to drift off course.
Camp one says you need a human reviewing every line of AI-generated code before it ships. Responsible and "serious" - yet leaving reviewers increasingly swamped.
Camp two says let the agents do everything. Steve Yegge's Gas Town epitomizes this idea - 20-30 simultaneous agents with specialized roles, plus an audacious vision called "The Wasteland" that federates thousands of these teams together.
Somewhere between the swamp and the wasteland, there's a pragmatic path being paved: the human stays in the loop for every change - not wading through diffs, but charting the course. Exercising taste and judgment, and staying close enough to the ground to sense when things start to drift off course.