Yeah I did contact them a month ago - no reply. Then again 2 weeks ago - also no reply.

Thats why I made this post.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50294446

Points: 2

# Comments: 4

By blind shipping I mean a scenario like this: I want to implement a functionality but I describe it on an abstract level to my agent, my agent implements it in like 5-8 commits and pushes the solution - the solution works! im happy and go to the next problem.

Now yes I know what problem is solved but I am still not exactly aware of how it was solved, this happens far too often to all types of developers and engineers.

Now if you are a hobbyist and doing this for fun then you don't really care about the implementation you are just happy it works and continue on with your day.

But as an engineer you are responsible for the code you ship and sometimes you ship at speeds that makes it impossible to review the code. So I wanted to make something that was as simple as possible to use but also as effective as possible to review your code.

So I puzzled ownit together. Ownit is simple and straight forward. You add a functionality whether it's you or your agent. This gets commited in X amount of commits. When you soon come to push this. You get an interview, the interview is based off the git diff of the commits you added.

It will ask you things about the commit, why you chose this , what it solved, how it solved it. Simple questions that make sure you understand what you are doing.

There is also a badge on your repo showing how many commits you actually interviewed for and how many you skipped, to sort of show how authentic your code is and if you chose to interview for it or just blindly shipped it.

The way to set up Ownit is very simple and FREE with a NVIDIA nemotron api key you get at nvidia models. Ive had a few devs try it and honestly the feedback was great.

Please let me know what you think if you try it out and if it actually improves your understanding of what you ship.

And what about the BIAS we mentioned earlier in the thread? Wouldn't that influence the surveillance? isn't that a bad thing? there is just so many things to consider.

It's so much better,smarter,more effective and affects so many different parameters.

Let's pretend US and EU agreed to slow down development, what would stop China or other countries outside "west" from continuing?

I think that international coordination would be very difficult when AI is a national competition.

But why would they stop when they have a clear path up? They don't care about the people they just care about growing their wallets. I don't see them ever pressing the stop button aslong as results are there, also I do think that results will probably deteriorate, as I would like to believe transformers will hit a limit or rather a bottleneck, perhaps several bottlenecks. Where progress will massively slow down.

But the smaller models are somewhat profitable as they require almost no comparable compute.

The surveillance concern is definitely justified and I think it is already happening before our own eyes..

But that is also the question I ask myself.. Is it really just a tool ? can we really use the same comparison as when the calculator came out ?

I am not opposed to using it, I am rather concerned about where this road will eventaully lead us.

I'm not arguing that AI can't improve productivity or code quality. I'm questioning what happens when developers become so reliant on it that their ability to reason through problems independently starts deteriorating.

Are the "experts" being optimistic ? or is the general population being too concerned?

2. I don't think automating tasks necessarily means eliminating a profession, but what AI can do is unfortunately speaking more than just automation.

3. Do you really think so ? I mean what do you think about the AI companies losing billions and billions every year, don't you think at some point they will just not have it anymore?

I totally agree with the benefits of the smaller models, but it's the large frontier models, potentially or accidently removing the security barriers from those can cause things far worse than the "hugging face" incident..

2.But that's exactly my point, Engineers feel forced to adopt AI to remain competitive, but high adoption rates in engineering professions don't neccesarily mean positive attitue towards it. The companies just want shipping..shipping.. They don't even care if the engineers understand the concept of what they're building.

I feel like the use of these habits will be biting them in the butt a few years ahead.. people should really be worried about these new workflows more than what they currently are - do I make sense?

I just think turning the blind eye will hit us like a big truck in a few years.. It really is about time..