this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
88 points (87.9% liked)

TechTakes

2589 readers
34 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MoonMelon@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Reading his response, I think calling it "slop" isn't being totally fair, but it does sound like he should hand it off again or close the project. Not having test coverage for something is bad, but it happens. It sounds like the alternatives have this issue also. But the sailing comment is kind of tragic. Just go sailing, dude. Unless you have a phylactery under your desk the project will outlive you anyway, and honestly that's the best compliment a developer can get.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It literally is slop. It's always correct to call slop slop.

[–] MoonMelon@lemmy.ml 16 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I rewrote the rsync test suite in python from the old shell script design. I did the design for that myself (and I’m really quite pleased with it), but used claude with cross-checks from codex and gemini to do the grunt work. I did not just vibe-code “convert test suite to python”.... I used AI tools to do the grunt work because they are good at that. I reviewed every part of it myself and ran through a huge amount of CI time getting it right

If what he claims is true then he's using LLMs for test coverage with significant editing by hand. I hate LLMs, but even I have to admit this seems like one of the few, valid use cases of LLM assisted coding. Unless "slop" has become one of those words that's just lost all meaning.

[–] diz@awful.systems 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's a perfect example of how "using LLMs for test coverage" can also be harmful. He expected the tests to to prevent introduction of said regressions, probably based on a combination of the quantity of tests and their style (they look like what decent human written tests look like). But the tests are AI slop, and so they give a lot less value per line of code than he expects, hence a significant regression.

It is literally useful to call these tests AI slop, and the problem is in part caused by not calling them AI slop, and having consequent inflated expectations.

[–] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 10 points 3 days ago

On one of the BlueSky threads going over over the test code, one of the things they uncovered was some stuff running as root which in no world should be necessary. He may not have just prompted Claude to "convert test suite to python", but there's a lot there that seem like clear red flags in terms of AI slop code.

Which is no surprise, really, given that properly proof-reading AI code is often much more labour intensive than just writing the code oneself. It's easy for things like this to slip through the cracks, even if you are trying to check the AI output

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 17 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I commend to you jonny's thread on the tests:

https://neuromatch.social/@jonny/116666900898570791

It keeps turning out that when you look at the AI output, it's shit.

[–] MoonMelon@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I don't know anything about rsync aside from as a user, but I am pretty experienced with Python and I admit those tests look really bizarre. If he did "slot machine" code it (a term I wasn't familiar with) then yeah, I agree that's slop. If he didn't, I don't understand why he made these changes. OK yeah, that's a bad sign.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 21 points 4 days ago (1 children)

every vibe coder insists they're shooting up krokodil responsibly

krokodil is such a good analogy goddamn