A weekly ops meeting where they talk about ensuring PRs with AI contributions get extra scrutiny? I think that's significant news.
replyExactly. This is real world pushback on the "software is solved" narrative from AI labs. Also, most orgs try to copy Amazon for some reason more than big tech firms. "At our org, we disagree and commit" - yeah you made that one up yourself. Anyway, this is going to have a lot of impact in my view.
replyThere was nothing mentioned in the meeting or messaging about PRs with AI contributions. There are no extra requirements for review or scrutiny of AI-generated-code. The media reports about this have been excessively misleading about this.
replyIt's not extra scrutiny. Doing code reviews for every commit is a standard practice at Amazon and has been for a decade plus.
replyid.expect COEs to be coming up with AI code action items though, not to have more thorough human checks
replyThere's an explicit tension: SWEs would love that as a "get out of jail free" card, but their management chain is being evaluated by ajassy on AI/ML adoption. Admitting AI code as the root cause of a CoE is gonna look really bad unless/until your peers are also copping to it.
replyI think its a question 2 or 3 in a why chain, but 4 and 5 need to be why the agent screwed up, and there needs to be action items that are around giving the ai better guardrails, context, or tooling.
reply"get a person to look at it" is a cop-out action item, and best intentions only. nothing that you could actually apply to make development better across the whole company