Watch how developers breathlessly defend code quality and stand tall ready to die on the hill against "AI slop". Craftsmanship, quality control, oh, it's all so, so important. No, it's absolutely vital to civilization.

Then witness the amazing reversal when some member of The Tribe pushes unbelievably unreadable slop that works. Then we see his Ring getting kissed by all the betas: "if it work, it works".

Pick a side. Quality is important or not?

Before AI Slop most code quality that ran in production was shit, that's the GP's point. Anyone who thinks otherwise simply did not have to come in contact with a wide variety of code in their job.

Yet these same developers, these slop machines, are willing to die for "craftsmanship" and "code quality" when they are threatened by statistics. I don't see how you addressed my point.

Nuance is not your specialty, clearly

To call out The Tribe as hypocritical, you first need The Tribe to have a consensus opinion. Agentic coding in particular has been very polarizing both on HN and in the developer community at large - there is no consensus opinion.

This is a case of tribalism, absolutely zero rationality and people will do mental gymnastics or get nasty if you try to force it. These people have decided that they HATE AI, and LOVE gooning on famous programmers, and public stances they take will support that, logic or consistency be damned.

>some member of The Tribe >his Ring getting kissed >all the betas

Wow the quality of online discourse is really in the gutter.

I think "quality" (quoted to keep the term vague) is important for long-term maintainability of software at scale (>1 developer). However, working / shipped / earning code is always better than quality code that isn't used in production.

ffmpeg, facebook, claude, twitter etc might not have existed if the authors focused on quality over shipping.