Don't want to be too judgemental but does "Self Serve invite link" feature really needs 50 commits, an army of bots, countless nitpicking and 140+ messages? We are not launching Apollo to the Moon here.
I don't know this particular project but seeing threads like this kill any motivation to contribute.
"We are a fast moving start up (even at 3-4 years old), we believe in moving fast and breaking things ... That's why we don't do code reviews or unit tests.. we just edit live running code and restart the server"
Vs
"This one line change needs 4 -5 commits to add feature flags,unit tests, integration tests - all to be reviewed by different teams and wait 1-2 months to be deployed properly to production"
I worked for a big tech and may be I was lucky but code wise it was much more tame. You may need to get an army of people to sign off the feature but nobody was scrutinizing my code like that
> Haha, wait until you hear how long and how many people it takes to change the text for a single button at a company like Google
I feel this is a needlessly obtuse statement. I'll explain you why, as I've worked professionally with frontend development. From your comment it seems you don't have that type of context.
The text that is expected to feature in a UI element is a critical factor in cross cutting concerns such as product management and UX design, and it involves things like internationalization and accessibility support. This means that if you change a line of text, it needs to be translated to all supported languages, and the translation needs to meet usability and GUI requirements. This check needs to be done in each and every single locale supported.
I can give you a very concrete example. Once I was tasked with changing a single line of text in a button featured in a dialog. It turns out the french translation ended up being too long that forced line breaks. The UI framework didn't handled those line breaks well and reflowed the whole UI, causing a huge mess. This required new translation requests, but it turned out that the new translations were too vague and ambiguous. Product Managers got involved because the french translation resulted in poor user experience. Ultimately the whole dialog was redesigned.
But to you it's just a text on a single button, isn't it?
> Antiwork emerged from Gumroad's mission to automate repetitive tasks. In 2025, we're taking a bold step by open-sourcing our entire suite of tools that helped run and scale Gumroad. We believe in making powerful automation accessible to everyone.
It looks like most of the coderabbit comments were genuinely addressed. Can't easily follow the Cursor ones - they definitely have some work to do on the right presentation / summary folding.
So yeah, it does look like they bring value for genuinely more reliable code.
I feel you, at our workplace someone added some AI Code review thing and it slops the whole PR with useless sequence diagrams and poems (why would I want to read an AI slop poem?) and pages and pages of instructions on how to interact with it.
Our Slack channel is also completely slopped to the point it's mostly bot conversations constantly spamming about review reminders, pull request statuses, and other useless info you can just look up yourself if you need it.
The signal to noise ratio is to the point where I just ignore everything.
My boss is obsessed with copilot PR summaries and they make me want to scream. A 12-line PR with a 40-line summary? And each description is "updated and enhanced <file>... Updated and enhanced <file>"
There's no utility in reading them, which means asking people more questions directly in slack instead, which genuinely makes the entire process slower for everyone. I know for a fact that no developer in my team would struggle to write 4-5 bullet points for any given PR in less than 2 minutes. My boss just genuinely thinks the slop is better (probably because he's not usually the one reading them)
Our Confluence is also rapidly turning into nothing but totally uninformative Claude-generated noise.
It's annoying to be repeatedly called a Luddite for questioning this stuff when the end results can be so obviously wasteful and unhelpful.
"Your PR is missing testing results. Now, with playright pro, enjoy agentic debugging analysis that coordinates with coding agents including claude code, cursor, copilot, and more! Only 19.99!"
Your last link seems to show alot of PRs being rejected because screenshots and test results werent included. I do get your point about the grammar rule being enforced badly, but the link isnt a great example it
This would be best implemented inline with the textbox of the comment form. If you want to give people feedback on their grammar then do it while they are actually writing - not after. Otherwise you just make an already hard to follow thread even more noisy.
This makes me wonder if AI usage will end up part of job position listings, similar to remote days, if it is not already. How much AI agent will you be able to use/be subjected to? Are people looking for this already when job searching?
Some companies are definitely already looking for it - I think as part of my job search, I've run into probably atleast 4 or 5 companies that, on top of having it as a qualification, ask specific questions on the job application about what AI tools you use and how they've made you more productive
I'm by no means a super keen or heavy user, I've barely dabbled really, but if we were hiring at the moment I think I'd ask about it - it's suddenly a huge part of understanding how a person works and what they might be like to interact with. Up there with considering cover letter/email/CV writing style, and commit messages from any take-home or their public repos.
And now when candidates submit take home tests for me to review, half of them are barely functional AI slopfests.
A goddamn staff engineer candidate with 20 years experience submitted an auto generated, broken app, and then tried to pass it off as though it didn't work because our API was down. No, the AI hard coded the wrong URL and he didn't notice (the correct URL was specified in the email containing the test instructions)
I run several job boards, and though there hasn't yet been any postings requiring the candidate's using AI (also not all that likely in the particular field), I am noticing a definite increase in the number of lists with emoji preceding each bullet point, and the use of em dashes. Personally, if I were a job seeker, I'd find that off-putting just as much as if I were presented with the requirement to use AI in my job.
Mathematicians use calculators, and so too do elementary school students, and grocery store clerks, and civil engineers. What each person needs from a calculator can be similar, but would you give a graphing calculator to the store clerk and expect them to be more "productive?"
Admittedly, my metaphor is leaky—and I also can't comment on the participants of the PR—but after reading the comments and the code itself, I'm getting a lot of "here’s a new calculator with a bunch of graphing functions, trigonometric menus, and poem generators—now go do the basic arithmetic you were already doing, but you work for the calculator now" vibes.
Said another way, it took me a lot more time and effort to understand what the bots were saying and if I agreed, than it did for me to formulate my own thoughts and questions.
Like the saying goes, "the best calculator is the one you have with you," and I'd much rather just use my own.
Readit News
I don't know this particular project but seeing threads like this kill any motivation to contribute.
Deleted Comment
"We are a fast moving start up (even at 3-4 years old), we believe in moving fast and breaking things ... That's why we don't do code reviews or unit tests.. we just edit live running code and restart the server"
Vs
"This one line change needs 4 -5 commits to add feature flags,unit tests, integration tests - all to be reviewed by different teams and wait 1-2 months to be deployed properly to production"
I feel this is a needlessly obtuse statement. I'll explain you why, as I've worked professionally with frontend development. From your comment it seems you don't have that type of context.
The text that is expected to feature in a UI element is a critical factor in cross cutting concerns such as product management and UX design, and it involves things like internationalization and accessibility support. This means that if you change a line of text, it needs to be translated to all supported languages, and the translation needs to meet usability and GUI requirements. This check needs to be done in each and every single locale supported.
I can give you a very concrete example. Once I was tasked with changing a single line of text in a button featured in a dialog. It turns out the french translation ended up being too long that forced line breaks. The UI framework didn't handled those line breaks well and reflowed the whole UI, causing a huge mess. This required new translation requests, but it turned out that the new translations were too vague and ambiguous. Product Managers got involved because the french translation resulted in poor user experience. Ultimately the whole dialog was redesigned.
But to you it's just a text on a single button, isn't it?
Shouldn't automation be somewhat useful? All these bot comments — do they really bring more value than they create distractions?
> Antiwork emerged from Gumroad's mission to automate repetitive tasks. In 2025, we're taking a bold step by open-sourcing our entire suite of tools that helped run and scale Gumroad. We believe in making powerful automation accessible to everyone.
So yeah, it does look like they bring value for genuinely more reliable code.
https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/comments/7lkgdk/video_game_hu...
Our Slack channel is also completely slopped to the point it's mostly bot conversations constantly spamming about review reminders, pull request statuses, and other useless info you can just look up yourself if you need it.
The signal to noise ratio is to the point where I just ignore everything.
There's no utility in reading them, which means asking people more questions directly in slack instead, which genuinely makes the entire process slower for everyone. I know for a fact that no developer in my team would struggle to write 4-5 bullet points for any given PR in less than 2 minutes. My boss just genuinely thinks the slop is better (probably because he's not usually the one reading them)
Our Confluence is also rapidly turning into nothing but totally uninformative Claude-generated noise.
It's annoying to be repeatedly called a Luddite for questioning this stuff when the end results can be so obviously wasteful and unhelpful.
AI code review really does help but only when used correctly
I'm building the tool to fix that
When
https://github.com/antiwork/flexile/pull/427#issuecomment-30...
results in
https://github.com/antiwork/flexile/pull/427#issuecomment-30...
More incredible examples where a LLM flags contributors' pull requests because their comments contain minor grammar errors:
https://github.com/antiwork/flexile/pulls?q="our+contributin...
A goddamn staff engineer candidate with 20 years experience submitted an auto generated, broken app, and then tried to pass it off as though it didn't work because our API was down. No, the AI hard coded the wrong URL and he didn't notice (the correct URL was specified in the email containing the test instructions)
I want off Mr Altman's wild ride lol
I basically just stop reading on sight
Mathematicians use calculators, and so too do elementary school students, and grocery store clerks, and civil engineers. What each person needs from a calculator can be similar, but would you give a graphing calculator to the store clerk and expect them to be more "productive?"
Admittedly, my metaphor is leaky—and I also can't comment on the participants of the PR—but after reading the comments and the code itself, I'm getting a lot of "here’s a new calculator with a bunch of graphing functions, trigonometric menus, and poem generators—now go do the basic arithmetic you were already doing, but you work for the calculator now" vibes.
Said another way, it took me a lot more time and effort to understand what the bots were saying and if I agreed, than it did for me to formulate my own thoughts and questions.
Like the saying goes, "the best calculator is the one you have with you," and I'd much rather just use my own.