196
AI-authored code needs more attention, contains worse bugs
(www.theregister.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2025
196 points (99.0% liked)
Programming
24095 readers
278 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Kinda funny the juxtaposition between the programmers' reaction to this compared to the "techies" reaction on the crosspost.
Maybe we're still early yet so I'll write the difference right now for posterity: Programming post is generally critical of the article and has several suggestions on how to improve the quality of agent-assisted code.
Technology post is pretty much just "REEEEEEEEEEE AI BAD"
I bet if you get in a hot tub that's a bit too warm you'll go "Ooh, that's a bit to warm".
And I bet if you jump into a boiling tub you'll scream "REEEEEEE HOOOOOT".
It's a matter of degrees, you see?
I'm not sure I get your analogy. This is more to me like two people got into a bath and one went "Ooh, that's a bit too warm" while the other screamed "REEEEEEE HOOOOOT”. The degree is the same. The response is not.
This article does not show as cross posted to any other community in the Voyager app.
EDIT: When I open the post in a web browser, the cross posts are visible. 🤷♂️
I seem to have missed those comments, could you point any out?