Comment by solenoid0937

Actually it's fully measurable but no one who's making these claims ever seems to want to measure it, nor share data in a public way so that others could measure it.

What we do see publicly is OSS projects overrun with poor submissions, for example.

> Lots of tech companies are doing just fine with purely AI written code at this point.

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

>Or he's just giving a sane take, one that most people in the Bay Area have by now.

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.

It is getting worse in a measurable way:

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.

This account is another LLM-hype peddler, shilling specifically for Anthropic.