Reading and understanding the code is essential, but in a collaborative environment, reviewing AI-generated code can be complex. It's about balancing trust in AI with the need for human oversight.
People won’t do that, unfortunately. We are a dying breed (I hate it). I went against my own instincts and vibe code this, works as a proof of concept.
You can see the session (including my typos) and compare what was asked for and what you got.
Reading and understanding the code is essential, but in a collaborative environment, reviewing AI-generated code can be complex. It's about balancing trust in AI with the need for human oversight.
People won’t do that, unfortunately. We are a dying breed (I hate it). I went against my own instincts and vibe code this, works as a proof of concept.
You can see the session (including my typos) and compare what was asked for and what you got.
Your starting point is that people won’t read code, and you expect them to read someone’s llm session from git?
Another LLM will read it of course.
Sounds like we've got an Ape Coder here!
https://rsaksida.com/blog/ape-coding/
Related ongoing thread:
Ape Coding [fiction] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47206798 - March 2026 (93 comments)
Personally, I'm not going to be complicit in reshaping the field around the lazy and undisciplined.