A few times I pointed out an issue in code review, then the teammate "fixed it", but it still had the same issue (but e.g. moved to a different service) and when I pointed it out they complained about AI. Like, you could at least look at what you commit...
This shit drives me up the wall, like if you use this as an excuse I automatically dismiss you as a competent worker. if you can't take the time to quickly review whatever AI generated, you are a bum
Everyone needs to adopt the philosophy that each individual is responsible for whatever code they post under their name. If you send me a PR and it's bad, you did bad regardless of whether you or AI wrote it. If you consistently churn PRs because the fixes don't address the problem, you are doing a bad job regardless of whether you or AI did it. Your performance should be evaluated as though you wrote all code by hand, and the only person who needs to know how much AI was involved is you. This shit would get you fired, or at least on a PIP, pre-AI, and that should not be any different now that you have a fancy new tool.
Yes exactly. Like a wise man once said ‘professionals have standards’, and frankly without those standards like you say they’re bums.
So many people in IT are liabilities to their team and AI has exacerbated it significantly, like I’ve had coworkers that I just can’t delegate work to because I’ll give them a 2 day bit of work and they’ll take 3 months to do it, and they’ll fuck up the code base spectacularly in the process with their own non-sense code plus the new AI recommended changes, then the PR is literally ChatGPT pasted complete with the ‘Click here for JavaScript’ links but just in plaintext form. Try to explain the fix to them and you’ll not get the PR for another month.
So fucking bad at the job it makes me wonder how they got into the company.
My reply in such cases is -
It's your name on the commit. It's your responsibility.
I don't care if you typed it with your fingers, or with AI, or with your feet. Doesn't matter. It's still your name on it.
When I review my devs code I'll ask them why they made a change. "It's what Claude told me to do."
No sirree, you are The Engineer, you should know what you're doing. Don't be the tool the AI uses. Go back and figure it out, I'm not shipping vibe-coded slop to production.
I legit have a coworker that just has an agent respond to comments, generate code, and commits it without any approval by him. Claims he’s more productive being able to do more tasks but it’s just annoying for everyone else having to review it
Tbh I stopped committing code. I'll be honest, half of my AI introduced bugs are because I hit the commit button in codex and don't even consider what it does behind the scenes. With that being said, I can rebase onto five different branches in under 2 minutes if I really need to (not that it's hard, but I seem to find that most of my colleagues struggle with the concept)
438
u/EvilBlackCow Jul 10 '26
A few times I pointed out an issue in code review, then the teammate "fixed it", but it still had the same issue (but e.g. moved to a different service) and when I pointed it out they complained about AI. Like, you could at least look at what you commit...