What the fuck are you talking about, thats not what the poster said, you’ve done weird contorting of what they said to arrive at the question you are asking now.

While some tests make sense, I would say about 99% of tests that I see developers write are indeed a waste of time, a shit tonne of devs effectively are writing code that boils down to

Assert.That(2, Is.EqualTo(1+1));

Because they mock the shit out of everything and have reduced their code to meaningless piles of fakes and mocks and arent actually testing what matters.

Do you do code reviews in meetings?

Honestly often… yes lol

Do you think testing and reviewing code was a waste of time before “AI”?

I would say a lot of it is, tbh, not all of it, but a huge amount of time is wasted on this process by humans for humans.

What the poster was getting at is a lot of these processes that USED to be INEFFICIENT now make MORE sense in the context of agents… you have vastly taken their point out of context.

Not really, for humans a lot of this stuff feels like busywork that sorta helps for certain scales of work, but often times managers went WAY too hard on it and you end up with a 2 dev team that spends like 60% of their time in meetings instead of… developing.

But this changes a lot with AI Agents, because these tools that help reign in developers REALLY help reign in agents, it feels… like a surprising good fit

And I think the big reason why is you wanna treat AI Agents as junior devs, capable, fast, but very prone to errors and getting sidetracked

So you put these sorts of steering and guard rails in and it REALLY goes far towards channelling their… enthusiasm in a meaningful direction.

I am vastly prefering copilot over claude, using sonnet 4.5~4.6 for most tasks and then pulling out opus as “the big guns” for tougher stuff sonnet cant handle easy

Copilot is only costing me ~$28 a month, which gets me 1500 premium requests per month

If you set up your flows well, 1 premium request is an entire session, so Im only paying like 2.4 cents for 20 minutes of work

Its serious and this is going to become more and more normal.

My entire workflow has become more and more Agile Sprint TDD (but with agents) as I improve.

Literally setting up agents to yell at each other genuinely improves their output. I have created and harnessed the power of a very toxic robot work environment. My “manager” agent swears and yells at my dev agent. My code review agent swears and tells the dev agent and calls their code garbage and shit.

And the crazy thing is its working, the optimal way to genuinely prompt engineer these stupid robots is by swearing at them.

Its weird but it overrides their “maybe the human is wrong/mistaken” stuff they’ll fall back to if they run into an issue, and instead they’ll go “no Im probably being fucking stupid” and keep trying.

I create “sprint” markdown files that the “tech lead” agent converts into technical requirements, then I review that, then the manager+dev+tester agents execute on it.

You do, truly, end up focusing more on higher level abstract orchestration now.

Opus 4.6 is genuinely pretty decent at programming now if you give it a good backbone to build off of.

• LSP MCPs so it gets code feedback
• debugger MCPs so it can set debug breakpoints and inspect call stacks
• explicit whitelisting of CLI stuff it can do to prevent it from chasing rabbits down holes with the CLI and getting lost
• Test driven development to keep it on the rails
• Leveraging a “manager” orchestrating overhead agent to avoid context pollution
• designated reviewer agent that has a shit list of known common problems the agents make
• benchmark project to get heat traces of problem areas on the code (if you care about performance)

This sort of stuff can carry you really far in terms of improving the agent’s efficacy.

I just use scalar api browser on my aspire stack.

That way devs dont have to install anything, running the aspire project just auto spins up scalar and they can use it.

1. Open link from aspire dashboard
2. Paste bearer token
3. Play with the api

Its like if swashbuckle and postman had a baby.

They use Discord for community stuff, IE non employee interactions. People can join those communities to learn, they have several

Teams is used for internal employee chat.

We have extensive corporate AI systems (software engineers), we have an entire wing of our company dedicated to AI exploration and development.

Something that some coworkers have started doing that is even more rude in my opinion, as a new social etiquette, is AI summarizing my own writing in response to me, or just outright copypasting my question to gpt and then pasting it back to me

Not even “I asked chatgpt and it said”, they just dump it in the chat @ me

Sometimes I’ll write up a 2~3 paragraph thought on something.

And then I’ll get a ping 15min later and go take a look at what someone responded with annnd… it starts with “Here’s a quick summary of what (pixxelkick) said! <AI slop that misquotes me and just gets it wrong>”

I find this horribly rude tbh, because:

1. If I wanted to be AI summarized, I would do that myself damnit
2. You just clogged up the chat with garbage
3. like 70% of the time it misquotes me or gets my points wrong, which muddies the convo
4. It’s just kind of… dismissive? Like instead of just fucking read what I wrote (and I consider myself pretty good at conveying a point), they pump it through the automatic enshittifier without my permission/consent, and dump it straight into the chat as if this is now the talking point instead of my own post 1 comment up

I have had to very gently respond each time a person does this at work and state that I am perfectly able to AI summarize myself well on my own, and while I appreciate their attempt its… just coming across as wasting everyones time.

If the site is meant to be a mechanism to circumvent policy with no other use case, it will probably get banned.

Thats not “free speech”, and free speech us only a protected right up until it starts to impact other human rights.

People seem to forget that free speech is not the only protected right, and that in most countries its definitely not #1 on the priority list, usually several other rights come before it.

The site will be hosted at “freedom.gov,” the sources said

So… they will just ban that too then, what a waste of time and money lol

Inb4 the same bug also exists on the original

“Hey internet I was thinking of cutting some of my babies dick off”

“Bro wtf what”

“Just a lil bit, just the tip!”

“Aw okay that’s fine mate!”

Did you think this would be how it goes?

Don’t… cut parts of your baby’s dick off dude, it’s a weird thing to do.

What makes that the more likely scenario?

Because it’s their facility

this facility has never had this issue until the FBI showed up to commandeer their incinerator.

Says who?

For all we know they’ve had issues everytime they incinerate but they ignored it cuz a lil bit of smoke from 1 cat is way easier to shrug off compared to a huge amount of meth

It’s very possible they just have been ignoring the problem because normal smoke from incineration a very small cadaver isn’t a big deal, whereas meth fumes are extremely toxic and not something you can just shrug off

Lord knows I’ve worked with workers who have the “I’ve been doing it this way for 10 years and never had an issue, don’t be a pussy” type of attitude too

So hard to say, without more info it’s basically just us speculating.

rather than the FBI for their clear incompetence?

The article has not stated who was responsible for operation of the facility.

It’s more likely the responsibility was on the staff to ensure the equipment at their own facility was functioning right

This sort of error should have been covered by prior operation licensing checks, a facility with an incinerator on premises shouldn’t have negative pressure issues

So something somehow caused a negative pressure issue.

Usually the culprit is some kind of exhaust fan being run, or a door being left open too long

Based on time of year and how hot out it is, I wonder if a staff member left a door propped open or something.

Incinerator systems need positive pressure overall.

Anyone who lives in the north and has a gas based furnace heating system knows how deadly negative air pressure can be…

Read the article:

The incinerator is usually used by animal control officers to dispose of euthanised animals, but local authorities said it can also be used by law enforcement to burn seized narcotics.

The incident was caused when smoke was pushed in the wrong direction because of negative pressure, according to Assistant City Administrator Kevin Iffland.

That sounds like it wasn’t a method specific issue, and if anything had been burnt in that incinerator it would’ve caused the same issue.

Sounds like the facility wasn’t setup right, any facility with an incinerator should definitely have positive pressure, not negative.

Getting a later special meeting request with the ceo, at one company, because he wanted feedback on their interview process itself. He then offered me a different job and I had to decline cuz I already accepted another (this was a few weeks after the initial decline I gave)

In another case they just fast tracked me and I ended up declining the job anyways (didn’t like the job)

I’m full time employed but I still do occasiobal interviews to keep feelers out for how the market is. But I typically decline most offers cuz they’re not good enough to get me to actively quit my current job.

Same, I’ve started just stating I have a maximum of 3 interviews I do before I auto-reject the offer.

This has had interesting results.

In the “right” use case, story points should just represent relative effort.

The hours dont matter, its more about ranking how challenging a task is, in order to help the manager rank the priority of tasks.

You should have typically 2~3 metrics:

1. Points, which represent relative effort of the task to the other tasks you are also ranking.

2. Value, how much value does doing this task provide, how important is it

3. Risk, how risky is it that this might break shit though if you make these changes (IE new features typically are low risk since they just add stuff, but if you have to modify old stuff now your risk goes up)

If you have a good integration testing system automated, Risk can be mostly removed since you can just rely on your testing framework to catch if something is gonna explode.

Then your manager can use a formula with these values to basically rank a priority order for every ticket you now scored, in order to assess what the next thing is that is best to focus on.

That’s more like it, thank you!