I don't regret the times I show anger at work, but it's a definitely a fine line that can leave me feeling a bit uneasy afterwards. It's one of the "social capital" things; you need to earn enough good will to spend your anger on the battles that really matter to you.
tatterdemalion
joined 3 years ago
"Fraud" might be a bit strong, but Theo just generally seems to have myopic takes on programming. I always cringe when I watch his videos.
Why would you want your entire home folder in syncthing?
I'm not sure I need a lot of compute on my NAS. I guess I might as well get as much as I can before it becomes cost prohibitive. Not planning on running any local LLMs on it though, so a GPU is probably overkill.
I've been thinking about getting a real NAS machine instead of having my gaming PC always on. This looks pretty slick.
Archdioces Linux
Or both little dudes and big dudes to make the big dudes look even bigger. Worked well in The Odyssey.
Another commenter just told me about WAICT and there is also an experimental extension called WEBCAT by the freedom of the press foundation. Going to look into these more.
Thanks this is very interesting! I also found an extension called WEBCAT that does a similar thing.
I think that's the prevailing sentiment in this thread. People would rather trust the site to run the code as advertised and get some added convenience rather than verify the code for themselves.
The point is you can't prove the server won't serve you code that won't take your key and send it somewhere arbitrary.
view more: next ›
Agreed that the solution to metastasized slop debt is to just rewrite it. That's kind of another way of saying that your entire codebase was written at prototype quality, except worse because of all the hidden decisions no one made.
I think the solution is a radical shift in how we test and review code. If your coworkers weren't thorough at testing and code review before 2026, then you are probably suffering right now.
I'm guessing LLM advocates want to solve this problem by throwing more LLMs at it, I.e.adversarial review bots, harness engineering, etc. And those are probably good ideas to raise the competency of LLMs, but I don't think they can replace the better judgement of humans anytime soon.
If your workplace culture already had strong testing and code review standards, then a sloppy PR is going to fail the smell test quickly.
And the biggest problem I see is simply with lazy people who don't review their own slop but expect others to review it. It's infuriating and completely unacceptable.
Assuming everyone is trying their best, there is really no substitute for getting your hands dirty and making sure you at least understand all of the code you submit and take the time to interrogate the surrounding code as well. I don't think there is a hard rule to know that you've adequately "digested" and refined the LLM output. But even before LLMs, I used to review my own code and iterate to make it more readable. It's like writing prose: you read, edit, re-read, until it's good.