• rozodru@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    19 hours ago

    no, as someone whose entire job is code reviewing ai slop you LITERALLY know at first sight just by looking at it what is written by an LLM and what is written by a real person.

    • definitemaybe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Sure, but that’s not what this is about. This isn’t just banning AI-written code, it’s banning AI-assisted code. If you even use a Google Gemini “AI-summary” at the top of your search results for something simple like the name of a function, then your code is AI-assisted.

      There’s no way anyone can detect that. And banning it is silly.

      But the point is, imho, that if nobody can tell if it’s AI-assisted, then who cares? This is more for them to fire a warning shot that you’d better be sure your AI-assisted code is good enough to pass, or they can reject or and, potentially, ban you without notice.

    • chrash0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      18 hours ago

      as someone who has a similar job, i don’t think it’s so obvious. there’s a lot of middle ground between an AI slop PR and artisanal, hand-crafted code. if i use a library or algorithm or pattern suggested by ChatGPT or use Copilot to autocomplete a simple function or have Claude generate test cases, that’s all “AI assisted”.

    • voidsignal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      Yeah. But this guy says we can’t. I wonder what metric they use to assert “the sky is blue” is a true statement.

      Probably needs to XP a bit…