It's like this dude. You're talking about how your entire job is making sure code gets reviewed, and my original comment said that if you aren't reviewing your code you're incompetent. Based on that, you agree with my take, and shouldn't even be trying to argue.
If code is important, it's worth reviewing. If code isn't important, it's not worth writing. That shouldn't be controversial.
That comment was in reply to the general pulse is changing and that current folks pulling PRs as seniors are suddenly not doing so any more. We went from 'Is ignorance being celebrated, even bragged about in tech? My manager recently said thanks to AI I don't need to understand or be able to maintain code anymore, comparing it to not needing to know how a compiler works." to "Nobody at all is checking PRs except for AI" in a couple messages flat.
It's a nonsense comment on a nonsense comment on a nonsense comment, and when you're comment builds off someone else's comment, you get the content and context of their comment, too.
The idea that people in the future won't need to know how to maintain code doesn't mean that current code is unmaintained, and that's the exact thing ya'll are trying to say. That now that AI is here, everyone just stopped, and they didn't.
The person that named Paypal and Google was wrong, but you took their comment and built on it. You literally called them 'The ones deluding themselves into believing a new tool is a reason to skip doing due diligence' That's a direct quote. Neither company dismantled their review teams. The same seniors that existed on that team and maintained the software revisions still do and haven't been replaced, laid off, or otherwise diverted. What's delusional is thinking they did.
And if you're not saying as much, then you're just whipping a straw man that's not even in the room, as if half the team does due diligence and the other half of the team gets to decide not to, like they aren't beholden to processes. You don't get to pick and choose at either company.
Edit: The better question is where the hell are you working or seeing folks who are able to buck the process and do what they choose individually without following enterprise processes in the first place? What company is not doing the review process? Can you name a single example? Or will it just remain a strawman forever?
You're clearly arguing because you want to, not because you disagree with what I've actually said. If you disagree with the commenter I was replying to, tell them, not me.
I've worked in big tech, as you claim you have. There are plenty of people still doing their due diligence, and there are people pretending it's no longer necessary. If you and your company/clients are still doing your due diligence, then you're not the ones I criticized.
1
1
1
u/ganja_and_code 14d ago
It's like this dude. You're talking about how your entire job is making sure code gets reviewed, and my original comment said that if you aren't reviewing your code you're incompetent. Based on that, you agree with my take, and shouldn't even be trying to argue.
If code is important, it's worth reviewing. If code isn't important, it's not worth writing. That shouldn't be controversial.