nfg

Lunar libration is easily apparent and actively exploited by amateur astronomers to glimpse more than 50% of the surface.

« it's telling that you perceive any criticism of AI code reviewer burnout as "sticking your fingers in your ears" »

Go back and re-read the quote from your comment - which I responded to: “ You will not convince the person drowning you in 2000 line PRs to stop. Start looking for a new job as if you have already been fired.”

I’m not overreacting to some nuanced take here. I’m not sure how to characterise quitting as a response to over-enthusiasm / slop as anything other than the career equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears. I’ve been there, I’ve had the arguments, I have little sympathy for staff/principal engineers or above who react like this - their job is to fix the organisation, put a yoke around the beast of AI and find a way to tap the benefits and use the problems (like those 2000 line PRs) as a golden signal for where you need to educate and improve process and planning.

Again - I’m not selling anything here, I just have found it an interesting challenge over the last year and one where I’ve been happy to make progress organisationally despite the frustrating moments. If someone’s response to a problem like this is to throw their hands up in despair or to engage in whatever the logical opposite of AI-hype is (which the article resorts to repeatedly) then yes I’d worry about being laid off. If you’re in an organisation where you don’t have the agency to fix problems then absolutely - start looking for a new job.

I don’t buy it - if you’re an engineering leader and this is happening it’s your responsibility to get out there and fix the problem through education, process improvements, improved automated quality checks, better planning. Sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting “no!” is not a sustainable strategy. Figure out what would allow your throughput to double, triple etc and go organise it. Focus on bottlenecks and the most difficult pieces. I’m speaking from active experience here.

Ever work on a AAA game?

From left to right: Saturn, Mars and Mercury.

I’d agree, though maybe there’s a more charitable reading of the OP - “uninformed” is one of those accusations that it’s rarely very polite or fair to level against an individual but sometimes is reasonable against a group based on observation. My experience would be that it’s true that “devs says lots of uninformed things” - and I’d include myself in that. It’s been my experience that it’s particularly tough in this space at this time because:

1. Tooling is changing very fast but people tend to form sticky opinions (reasonably enough - there’s only so much time in the world).

2. It’s just hard to form robust objective opinions - you have to make a real effort to build test cases and evaluation processes and generally the barrier to entry there is pretty high.

So - I agree, calling people uninformed is not a great way to win them over, but maybe that’s the price of living in a world of anecdotes which become fixed in people’s minds.

And this has been comparing like for like with CC - say Opus 4.6 on the same reasoning effort? Hasn’t been my experience particularly but fair enough. I do tend to use them in different situations (CC outside of work).

Have you used the gh copilot cli? What would stand out most to you as gaps right now?

Fame doesn’t enter it - the point is Karpathy has about as strong a claim as anyone to having “actually used LLMs for non trivial tasks”.

Do you realise who you’re replying to?

If you could share I’d be really interested in hearing a concrete example of the two behaving differently. I work in Microsoft (not on copilot - though I’m an heavy user, and use Claude code in a personal capacity) and would be quite happy to repro and report back to the copilot cli team who are responsive.

As a matter of interest are you using the copilot cli?

Nearly 6 months in South America - then we ran out of money and headed home!

Memories!

Back in 2012 after 8 months across Asia (through Turkey, Iran, India, Nepal, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Laos and Hong King) we took a flight to Buenos Aires (well, via SF for a weekend) then went entirely overland: - Buenos Aires - Puerto Madryn - Ushuaia - El Calafate - El Chalten - Bariloche - El Bolson - Mendoza - Salta - El Cafayate - Into Bolivia… - La Quiaca - Tupiza - Salar de Uniyi - Sucre - La Paz - Copabanca - Isla Del Sol - Into Peru! - Puno - Cusco - Aguas Calientes - Arequipa - Tacna - Into Chile! - San Pedro de Atacama - Into Argentina - Salta - Puerto Iguazú - Into Brazil - Foz do Iguaçu - Rio de Janeiro - Ihla Grande - Paraty - San Paulo - Home (via Amsterdam)!

I’m glad we did it when we were younger - golden years.

> In other words, that usage you like is costing them tons of money

Evidence? I’m sure someone will argue, but I think it’s generally accepted that inference can be done profitably at this point. The cost for equivalent capability is also plummeting.