According to the release:

Adds experimental PostgreSQL support

The code was written by Cursor and Claude

14,997 added lines of code, and 10,202 lines removed

reviewed and heavily tested over 2-3 weeks

This makes me uneasy, especially as ntfy is an internet facing service. I am now looking for alternatives.

Am I overreacting or do you all share the same concern?

  • NoFun4You@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Like ppl thinking skilled engineers cannot vet AI output. AI is pretty good for programming.

    • mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      12 hours ago

      And yet there are cases like the Huntarr debacle, where the dev simply thought “and make sure your code complies with best security practices” to their vibe code prompts actually made it secure.

      They added 14k lines of code in a week, and ripped out 10k lines of existing code. That’s not something that a skilled programmer can reasonably vet in that amount of time. This is showing all the signs of AI slop, and none of the signs of debugged or vetted code.

    • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I have a few decades programming experience, as a professional software engineer, an open source developer, and a DevOps engineer. There is no way in hell I would do a code review where 15k lines were added and a similar amount of lines removed without having a long discussion with the person who made those changes. I’d want to ask a lot of detailed questions about the changes, questions that an LLM isn’t likely to answer, and most definitely not questions I’d be inclined to try to type into an LLM to try to get an answer.

      Over the years I’ve dealt with all manner of bugs, from overflows & underflows, to bad assumptions about logic flow, and much much more. The whole purpose of pointed questioning of the author is to be comfortable with decisions made in the code and to minimize the chances of all sorts of potential bugs.

    • Ohi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      You’re absolutely right, and the vast majority of people on this platform seem to get offended by anything AI related. Software engineers have been reviewing code made by other people since the dawn of the craft. Guess what y’all, AI generated code looks exactly the same, if not better on the first pass at creating a thing.

      Down vote me all you want homies. You’re living in a fantasy if you think all AI is slop. Sure, I can see how it’s ruining some content on the Internet, but for code related tasks, its going to dramatically change the world for the better.

    • thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 hours ago

      It’s not. That’s the problem. It actually sucks ass. It’s super low quality for anything more complex they s very simple CRUD app or a simple function. I say this as someone who s a heavy LLM user. It’s just bad code. It makes all kinds of simple mistakes. Just because code compiles doesn’t mean it’s good or does what you need it to do