惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

H
Help Net Security
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
雷峰网
雷峰网
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
博客园 - 聂微东
V
Visual Studio Blog
爱范儿
爱范儿
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
美团技术团队
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
Google DeepMind News
Google DeepMind News
Blog — PlanetScale
Blog — PlanetScale
The Cloudflare Blog
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
Vercel News
Vercel News
F
Fortinet All Blogs
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
M
MIT News - Artificial intelligence
小众软件
小众软件
月光博客
月光博客
A
About on SuperTechFans

Hacker News: Front Page

SPICE simulation → oscilloscope → verification with Claude Code — Lucas Gerads Introducing Claude Opus 4.7 Qwen Studio The Future of Everything is Lies, I Guess: Where Do We Go From Here? GitHub - SeanFDZ/macmind: Single-layer transformer in HyperTalk for the classic Macintosh Show HN: Agent-cache – Multi-tier LLM/tool/session caching for Valkey and Redis Ancient DNA reveals pervasive directional selection across West Eurasia [pdf] AI cybersecurity is not proof of work Moving a large-scale metrics pipeline from StatsD to OpenTelemetry / Prometheus GitHub - Nightmare-Eclipse/RedSun: The Red Sun vulnerability repository GitHub - SethPyle376/hiraeth: Local AWS emulator focused on fast integration testing, with SQS support, SQLite-backed state, and a debug-friendly web UI. A Better Ludum Dare; Or, How to Ruin a Legacy GitHub - macOS26/Agent: Any AI, replaces Claude Code, Cursor, OpenClaw. Over 18 LLM providers (Claude, OpenAI, Gemini, Ollama, Zai, HF, Qwen) wired into a native Mac app that writes code, builds Xcode projects, bumps versions, manages git, automates Safari, use AppleScript, JS or Accessibility, extend Agent! w/ MCP Servers, run tasks from your iPhone via Messages. YouTube now lets you turn off Shorts I Made a Terminal Pager Burgers | マクドナルド公式 Commands — HackerNews CLI documentation ChatGPT for Excel PiCore - Raspberry Pi Port of Tiny Core Linux Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds Google Broke Its Promise to Me. Now ICE Has My Data. Founding Engineer at Adaptional | Y Combinator CRISPR takes important step toward silencing Down syndrome’s extra chromosome GitHub - saffron-health/libretto: The AI toolkit for building reliable browser automations US v. Heppner (S.D.N.Y. 2026) no attorney-client privilege for AI chats [pdf] Unexpected €54k billing spike in 13 hours: Firebase browser key without API restrictions used for Gemini requests Fragments: April 14 Cal.com Goes Closed Source: Why AI Security Is Forcing Our Decision | Cal.com - Scheduling Software for Online Bookings Laravel raised money and now injects ads directly into your agent Codex Hacked a Samsung TV
When I reject AI code even if it works — Vinicius Brasil
Vinicius Brasil · 2026-06-21 · via Hacker News: Front Page

With implementation getting faster and faster, the real bottleneck moves to reviewing the volume of code generated by AI. I’m not even talking about your coworkers’ (and their agents’) PRs, but your own git diff after your coding agent has finished its job.

Even when I follow good practices – like starting with the plan mode, dividing big tasks into phases, and shipping small changes – I still feel cognitive overload when reviewing something I haven’t actually thought through myself.

GENERATED BETTER FIT

Before coding agents, when given a task, I would explore the codebase, think of different solutions, experiment, and only then implement. That could take days of consolidating all that context. When I finally submitted that PR, confidence was higher, and explaining each of my changes to my coworkers was easier.

I have to admit that with AI, completing big tasks still takes me days. More often than not, I reject all changes made by AI and start over. The difference between the first session and the second is not the LLM model, but the person behind the screen. With more time to consolidate the problem I’m trying to solve, I can drive the agent to a better solution instead of being driven by it.

Can you trust the diff?
FIG. Can you trust the diff?

More and more, I reject AI code for the same reasons:

  • I reject AI code when I can’t explain the approach in my own words.
  • I reject AI code when the diff is bigger than the problem.
  • I reject AI code when it introduces abstractions before proving they’re needed.
  • I reject AI code when it works locally but makes the system harder to reason about.
  • I reject AI code when I’m trusting the output more than my understanding.

It’s not uncommon to see engineers accept AI-generated changes too quickly, and that is why I advocate for required human review in conjunction with AI reviews. The reality is that code that runs and makes the CI green can still be a bad solution, and engineering has always been about implementing adequate, scalable, and extensible solutions.

I’ve been using coding agents for some time, and despite how impressive they are, they still need a great engineer guiding them to great solutions. Yes, coding agents can help you with this task with more than just writing code, but that doesn’t mean they can do it autonomously in a sustainable manner yet.