Top
Best
New

Posted by rzk 21 hours ago

Ask HN: How to deal with shipping AI-written code you don't understand?

I saw this LinkedIn post from a Meta engineer and it resonated with me:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ali-hamie_im-an-engineer-at-m...

> I'm an engineer at Meta and I never felt this uncomfortable doing my job. I'm writing code these days and it all feels like a black box. This new standard of shipping with AI is moving so fast that if we're going to spend our time checking each line of code, it's going to take forever. That means you can end up with systems you've built where you don't truly understand how all the code works. You understand the high level, but not every detail. And maybe this is becoming the new standard. It goes against every instinct of being a software engineer. I'm used to understanding what I'm building. Now I'm trying to figure out how much I need to understand before I'm comfortable moving forward. Are other engineers feeling this too?

How are you handling this?

408 points | 549 commentspage 17
tasktoagent 18 hours ago|
[flagged]
jongha 9 hours ago||
[dead]
parsatomosu 15 hours ago||
[flagged]
dnurvianto 17 hours ago||
[flagged]
Supercrzy 5 hours ago||
[flagged]
0x5150 15 hours ago||
[dead]
tonymet 10 hours ago||
[dead]
pluc 21 hours ago||
[flagged]
Ultcyber 13 hours ago||
hope this is sarcasm - why would quality not matter anymore? So why did it matter before in the first place?
ORDINAND_PIZZA 20 hours ago|||
wow, “quality is no longer an objective” is a wild idea that feels dangerously negligent.

quality is all we have, it’s what makes us different from these agents.

quality is perplexing to agents because it requires a strange loop into asking why. there’s not always a clear answer. but i think the power is in the ambiguity.

if we don’t know why (or don’t care) then what happens if we all adopt this attitude at scale?

pixl97 13 hours ago|||
With the number of software flaws we found even before AI, I don't think quality was ever job #1.
pluc 20 hours ago||||
The entire industry is dangerously negligent, we just have better tools and stronger incentives now. Why spend 3h code-reviewing a PR when you know if it breaks you just tell your agent to watch out for that specific scenario? Which executive will see that as time well spent?
11101010010001 13 hours ago|||
if quality is the currency, then we can be open and transparent about the code and software that we use. I suspect that most of the software that I use is crap, and was so even before AI came along. Maybe AI can actually make this crappy software better?
paid_dot_expert 20 hours ago|||
Sort of. What if you asked your second agent to fuzz test the work of the first agent, adversarial code review, or make a video to explain all the code.
voidUpdate 21 hours ago||
It's agents all the way down!
pluc 21 hours ago||
<that scene from the Matrix with hundreds of Agent Smith>.gif
reaperducer 11 hours ago||
Any software engineer shipping A.I. code should stop calling himself an "engineer."

Imagine the carnage if real engineers started vibe-designing bridges.

cheeze 11 hours ago|
I disagree here. Software engineering is a very different form of engineering than something like building a bridge. This has always been true. Even before LLMs, there was a lot of hobbled together code going out there from "real engineers."

I think it's silly to make strong statements like this. _Most_ professional software engineers (women too, not just him!) are using LLMs and are moving some amount of faster as a result.

senderista 10 hours ago|
This is OT and a cheap shot, but if I were an engineer at Meta I would have felt pretty uncomfortable well before AI showed up...