> I am going to try to make these points to my team, because I am seeing a huge influx of AI-generated PRs where the submitter interacts with CodeRabbit etc. by having Claude/Codex respond to feedback on their behalf.
Are people generally unhappy with the outcomes of this? As anecdotally, it does seem to pass review later on. Code is getting through this way.
It's slippery. You're swamped with low-effort PRs, can't possibly test and review all of them. You will become a visible bottleneck, and guess whether it's easier to defend quality vs. "blocking a lot of features" which "seem to work". If you're tied by your salary as a reviewer, you will have to let go, and at the same time you'll suffer the consequences of the "lack of oversight" when things go south.
Just reject a bunch of PRs two days before code freeze. They can go next sprint. In fact ask AI to provide a plausible reason for rejection. If anyone overrides, you are covered.
I am kind of already at that point. For all the complaining about context windows being stuffed with MCPs, I am curious what they are up to and how many MCPs they have that this is a problem.
> Parents reach a period in life where their kids strike out on their own and want little to do with them beyond a safety net. That’s normal and natural and the parents move onto a new phase too.
This is at best extremely cultural. It is certainly not a global norm and not really viewed as desirable, just necessary.
Average American doesn't move very far at all from their parents and America is where the idea of time limited parenting is most prevalent.
Really, just lack shame and sell something you do not have and bet that you can get it before anyone really presses too hard. It's an incredible thing to see.
reply