Tap a claim on the ring to put it at the centre.
← Code review as a review mechanism depends on reviewers being able to…
17 connected korrents · 16 moments on record from 31 Oct 2025 to 3 Sept 2026.
Everything filed under code generation
code generation
Everything filed under AI writing
AI writing
Everything filed under vibe coding
vibe coding
Everything filed under Anthropic
Anthropic
Everything filed under coding agents
coding agents
Everything filed under AI alignment
AI alignment Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Read this korrent: Code review as a review mechanism depends on reviewers being able to infer effort from reading code, and AI-agent-generated code erases that signal. Code review as a review mechanism depends on reviewers being able to infer effort from reading code, and AI-agent-generated code erases that signal. Last stated 5 months ago
7 May 2026
DC
David Crawshaw — holds since 2026-05-07 — tap for who they are
Same subject: AI-written code makes formal proof necessary, because human review of all that generated code becomes the bottleneck. — tap to centre the map on it AI-written code makes formal proof necessary, because human review of all that generated code becomes the bottleneck. Last stated 5 months ago
22 Apr 2026
MK
Martin Kleppmann — holds since 2026-04-22 — tap for who they are
Same subject: He does not read the boring parts of generated code, the data-shuffling and button alignment; what touches the database he reads and reviews. — tap to centre the map on it He does not read the boring parts of generated code, the data-shuffling and button alignment; what touches the database he reads and reviews. Last stated 7 months ago
12 Feb 2026
PS
Peter Steinberger — holds since 2026-02-12 — tap for who they are
Same subject: If you are not going to read the generated code, what you need is conformance testing: proof that it performs within the boundaries of the code it replaced. — tap to centre the map on it If you are not going to read the generated code, what you need is conformance testing: proof that it performs within the boundaries of the code it replaced. Last stated a month ago
12 Aug 2026
CM
Charity Majors — holds since 2026-08-12 — tap for who they are
Same subject: The value of agentic coding tools comes from how you configure and constrain them, not from raw code generation. — tap to centre the map on it The value of agentic coding tools comes from how you configure and constrain them, not from raw code generation. Last stated 7 months ago
6 Feb 2026
AK
Arvid Kahl — holds since 2026-02-06 — tap for who they are
Same subject: A person directing an AI agent rather than writing code themselves has no incentive to actually read the resulting code or engage seriously with reviewer feedback. — tap to centre the map on it A person directing an AI agent rather than writing code themselves has no incentive to actually read the resulting code or engage seriously with reviewer feedback. Last stated 5 months ago
7 May 2026
DC
David Crawshaw — holds since 2026-05-07 — tap for who they are
Same subject: Agentic code review raises the floor but cannot be trusted, because the model reading the code is the same model that wrote it, and it will tell you the code is great. — tap to centre the map on it Agentic code review raises the floor but cannot be trusted, because the model reading the code is the same model that wrote it, and it will tell you the code is great. Last stated 2 months ago
15 Jul 2026
DH
Dex Horthy — holds since 2026-07-15 — tap for who they are
Same subject: Review became a worse bottleneck under AI, because companies removed the review automation they had once AI started writing the code. — tap to centre the map on it Review became a worse bottleneck under AI, because companies removed the review automation they had once AI started writing the code. Last stated 6 months ago
22 Mar 2026
NF
Nicole Forsgren — holds since 2026-03-22 — tap for who they are
Same subject: Making the person who directs an AI agent also own the deployment removes the principal-agent misalignment that agent-driven code review creates. — tap to centre the map on it Making the person who directs an AI agent also own the deployment removes the principal-agent misalignment that agent-driven code review creates. Last stated 5 months ago
7 May 2026
DC
David Crawshaw — holds since 2026-05-07 — tap for who they are
Same subject: A stream of AI-written papers with any error rate at all becomes insufferable, because finding the error costs more than the paper is worth even at ninety-nine percent. — tap to centre the map on it A stream of AI-written papers with any error rate at all becomes insufferable, because finding the error costs more than the paper is worth even at ninety-nine percent. Last stated 3 months ago
30 Jun 2026
GS
Grant Sanderson — holds since 2026-06-30 — tap for who they are
Same subject: AI content should be labelled rather than filtered: content should be judged by its point of view, never by the tool that made it. — tap to centre the map on it AI content should be labelled rather than filtered: content should be judged by its point of view, never by the tool that made it. Last stated 2 months ago
9 Jul 2026
AM
Adam Mosseri — holds since 2026-07-09 — tap for who they are
Same subject: AI has done the first ninety per cent of the work of sounding human, and the last five per cent will turn out to be about ninety-five per cent of the work. — tap to centre the map on it AI has done the first ninety per cent of the work of sounding human, and the last five per cent will turn out to be about ninety-five per cent of the work. Last stated 11 months ago
31 Oct 2025
DH
Dan Houser — holds since 2025-10-31 — tap for who they are
Same subject: A person at maximum vibe-coding speed has about three productive hours a day, and a company that will not let them stop there is going to break. — tap to centre the map on it A person at maximum vibe-coding speed has about three productive hours a day, and a company that will not let them stop there is going to break. Last stated 6 months ago
11 Mar 2026
SY
Steve Yegge — holds since 2026-03-11 — tap for who they are
Same subject: A sense of achievement in software survives writing almost none of the code yourself. — tap to centre the map on it A sense of achievement in software survives writing almost none of the code yourself. Last stated 4 weeks ago
26 Aug 2026
DH
David Heinemeier Hansson — holds since 2026-08-26 — tap for who they are
Same subject: AI should be used as a failure machine that tests many ideas cheaply, not as a way to build one idea faster. — tap to centre the map on it AI should be used as a failure machine that tests many ideas cheaply, not as a way to build one idea faster. Last stated 3 months ago
14 Jun 2026
MP
Mark Pincus — holds since 2026-06-14 — tap for who they are
Same subject: A benchmark that ranks Claude Code last while it stays first in use is measuring the wrong thing, and has been for a year. — tap to centre the map on it A benchmark that ranks Claude Code last while it stays first in use is measuring the wrong thing, and has been for a year. Last stated 3 weeks ago
3 Sept 2026
DR
Dax Raad — holds since 2026-09-03 — tap for who they are
Same subject: A language model asked to summarize its own system prompt risks that prompt's content biasing the summary it produces. — tap to centre the map on it A language model asked to summarize its own system prompt risks that prompt's content biasing the summary it produces. Last stated 3 weeks ago
2 Sept 2026
SW
Simon Willison — holds since 2026-09-02 — tap for who they are
Same subject: A trust that owns the mission protects a company better than founder control does, which is why Anthropic needs no dual-class shares. — tap to centre the map on it A trust that owns the mission protects a company better than founder control does, which is why Anthropic needs no dual-class shares. Last stated 4 months ago
10 May 2026
ER
Eric Ries — holds since 2026-05-10 — tap for who they are
At the centre
Code review as a review mechanism depends on reviewers being able to infer effort from reading code, and AI-agent-generated code erases that signal.
Holds Read this korrent →
AI-written code makes formal proof necessary, because human review of all that generated code becomes the bottleneck.
Holds
He does not read the boring parts of generated code, the data-shuffling and button alignment; what touches the database he reads and reviews.
Holds
If you are not going to read the generated code, what you need is conformance testing: proof that it performs within the boundaries of the code it replaced.
Holds
The value of agentic coding tools comes from how you configure and constrain them, not from raw code generation.
Holds
A person directing an AI agent rather than writing code themselves has no incentive to actually read the resulting code or engage seriously with reviewer feedback.
Holds
Agentic code review raises the floor but cannot be trusted, because the model reading the code is the same model that wrote it, and it will tell you the code is great.
Holds
Review became a worse bottleneck under AI, because companies removed the review automation they had once AI started writing the code.
Holds
Making the person who directs an AI agent also own the deployment removes the principal-agent misalignment that agent-driven code review creates.
Holds
A stream of AI-written papers with any error rate at all becomes insufferable, because finding the error costs more than the paper is worth even at ninety-nine percent.
Holds
AI content should be labelled rather than filtered: content should be judged by its point of view, never by the tool that made it.
Holds
AI has done the first ninety per cent of the work of sounding human, and the last five per cent will turn out to be about ninety-five per cent of the work.
Holds
A person at maximum vibe-coding speed has about three productive hours a day, and a company that will not let them stop there is going to break.
Holds
A sense of achievement in software survives writing almost none of the code yourself.
Holds
AI should be used as a failure machine that tests many ideas cheaply, not as a way to build one idea faster.
Holds
A benchmark that ranks Claude Code last while it stays first in use is measuring the wrong thing, and has been for a year.
Holds
A language model asked to summarize its own system prompt risks that prompt's content biasing the summary it produces.
Holds
A trust that owns the mission protects a company better than founder control does, which is why Anthropic needs no dual-class shares.
Holds