alt Hacker NewsSkimmed through this. One heading is "The gap was never coverage. It was wiring.". Smeḷls very AI sloppy, won't bother reading...
I used to read anything and everything on HN, but my allergy to slop has made me stop doing that. I suppose that's a good thing?
Replies
My antennae were twitching early on, it was "That is a floor, not a total" that flipped the switch for me and I closed the piece.
I'm developing a distracting hypervigilance that kicks in whenever I start reading anything linked from here or lobsters or LinkedIn. Instead of focusing on whatever it's saying, I'm looking for the tells instead.
I hate what AI's doing to reading. It's like when the desktop publishing revolution reached folks who never could have put together a decent banner to save their lives, and suddenly chintzy Broderbund Print Shop-generated examples were hanging in every classroom. But at least that was limited to peeps who had access to a dot matrix printer and scads of tractor feed paper. Now clankers write for everybody who either can't write or won't put in the time, and the low-effort slop is everywhere.
It'd be one thing if they used AI to write a draft and then rewrote it to make it theirs. I'd read it! But they can't be bothered. Very unfortunate, and I refuse to waste my time on it.
Just post the prompt you used, Brand, I'd probably get more value...
I had to paste this into Claude and ask it to filter out the core idea. Here's the most important paragraph quoted from the article:
> The one repository with working CI has a workflow file of about 40 lines that runs a type check, the test suite, and a build on every pull request. Sixteen other repositories use the same test runner. Copying it sideways is an afternoon.
So I think they're saying that they never wired up CI, and as a result the value provided by their test suite in preventing bad code from shipping is limited.