I don't have any colleagues like that anymore, but even as far back as the last half of 2025 I was seeing that automated AI review was becoming effective enough that I considered it essential to any project where security was a serious concern.
replyThese days we're generating multiple times more code than we were writing before. That means a similar multiple of opportunities for bugs to be introduced - so the ability to automate security review is more impactful in proportion to that.
> while reducing bugs on my side with the help of AI.
replyHow do you know? You might be adding (latent) bugs every time your LLM fixes one for you.
Same as usual: add tests. Over time the test suite becomes the spec that describes how the software should function. As the test suite grows you squeeze out room for undefined behaviour and bugs.
reply> I've been seeing more bugs from their side, while reducing bugs on my side with the help of AI.
replyYou should question your ability to see any bugs on YOUR side.
Have you asked your colleagues what it’s like to deal with your code?
replyIt's not 2025 anymore my friend.
replyYet apparently people still dump unvetted LLM outputs onto their colleagues and expect them to thank them for the privilege. So it’s worth asking them what the consensus is of their work to find out if it’s the case.
replyThat's the old way. The current way is nobody reviews anything. The LLM reviews it all and nobody even reads it, they just click approve, and merge blindly. I wish I were kidding.
reply