CIRCLE WITH A DOT

@pointlessone

Heh, I guess maybe CI isn’t the right analogy either when you put it like that. I’ll try and remember to grab a couple next time I deal with some. I will just reinforce though, I was only arguing that it does have value, not that it’s fantastic!

@pointlessone @nateberkopec @zenspider

If there’s evidence of that I’d be interested, but I don’t think those things are analagous. Alerts are different in that they’re _push_, so they do need to be high value or you will tune them out entirely, agreed. But I _don’t_ think learning to tune out AI noise turns into tuning out humans here, you go into the process with a different headspace (I do, at least). The AI feedback feels like a CI step, the human feedback is a conversation.

@zenspider @nateberkopec @pointlessone Translates fine, but it’s a false analogy. If the F- student made my work better and it took me next to no time to check their work, then that sounds fine. As for your first point, that feels more just like a random insult

@nateberkopec @zenspider @pointlessone I really don’t see why. Objectively, it’s prevented bugs shipping and cut-down on overall review time by catching some issues before a human review. The cost is a minute or two of the author’s time to scan the comments and quickly resolve the ones that aren’t helpful. I’m not saying it’s perfect, I am saying it has value _in this context_.

@nateberkopec We have the built in Copilot review, which spews nonsense ~75% of the time but in this specific context (code review) its easy enough to ignore the noise for the value in the few comments left. We're about to migrate to Claude though, which I'm hoping is an improvement.