> We still require a code review for any change and it's becoming a bottleneck - for sure
> I fought for years trying to convince my colleagues to write good commit messages. Now Claude is writing great commit messages but since *I'm no longer looking at code* - I never see them. I don't think Claude uses them either.
(emphasis added)
In a way, obvious injected opinions benefit culture, by making formerly-unaware readers skeptical.
I have almost certainty by now that half of the web is just bots steering the narrative of humans, because I’ve never seen so much non sense being normalized in my life. Dish soap drinking level I mean.
Seriously, not a bot. Just a software engineer who feels gaslighted because I see AI used in one way at work and then I go to Hacker News and I feel like I am using a different technology compared to everyone else.
And don't get me wrong. I would like to be more skeptic about AI because I enjoy writing code, I enjoy a high salary with great benefits. But with the speed and direction we're seeing now (so I am not only looking at this specific point in time but rather also the direction and the fact that no one knows what they're doing) - I do worry about losing this. So I am definitely crossing my fingers that it is a bubble but I just don't see the evidence yet.
Above, you said:
> We still require a code review for any change
And:
> We don't really vibe though. At least I don't. I see it more as comment driven development. I need to understand the code and what I want to achieve where in the codebase
But in your previous comment, you said:
> since I'm no longer looking at code
And:
> Branches are now irrelevant
How can all of these things be true?
Lots of tech companies are doing just fine with purely AI written code at this point.
Saying that the quality is getting worse in some immeasurable way (while incidents remain the same) is literally unfalsifiable.
If there are so many, surely you or one of the other AI supporters have a public example?
I’m aware of two examples, although they’re (mostly routine) translation with existing test infrastructure, so easier for an LLM:
- Bun’s rewrite, although we haven’t seen the effects on further development
- Ladybird’s rewrite, which seems to be continuing fine
I don't know what the Bay Area note is supposed to mean in the context of the whole post - unless you want to reinforce that it surely means that it's a sane take... In which case, I'm not certain the non-Bay readers would agree that it comes from an unbiased culture.
1) Since vibe coding GitHub has frequent outages and isn't able to load a large number of comments.
2) The slop translation of Bun resulted in immediate bugs (https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/issues/30719) that the hyped Mythos apparently did not find.
3) AI features and (likely, though not proven) AI code resulted in a 0-day in Google code:
https://projectzero.google/2026/01/pixel-0-click-part-1.html
The house of cards is beginning to collapse.
What we do see publicly is OSS projects overrun with poor submissions, for example.
It is like saying "no one can produce a viable CPU because I can't tape one out in my garage."
Focus on that message, not the messenger.
HN was a tremendous resource built by its members and the moderators. In the last year or so a lot of that has been destroyed by people who have no sense of decency. They see deception as a virtue. They call it hustle or whatever. WTF?
Pretty sus, bot or otherwise.
Often such comments appear just before the submission is abandoned to wrap up the thing.