this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2026
361 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

83295 readers
3730 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

An internal memo dispatched by senior execs at Red Hat suggests the software biz is starting to push AI tooling within its Global Engineering department. RHEL may be about to get some Windows 11-style "improvements."

It carries the heading "Engineering that's evolved and amplified for the AI era," and for any AI skeptics in the developer teams at Red Hat, the tone of the email may raise alarm bells. The times are changing, it states.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bookmeat@fedinsfw.app 31 points 21 hours ago (4 children)

The real concern here is that they intend to push velocity. Senior devs are already struggling to keep up with vetting these velocitized changes and are sending out warnings that quality and security will suffer. IMO the tech isn't mature enough to run unsupervised and transforming senior devs into code reviewers is a big mistake.

[–] maplesaga@lemmy.world 6 points 18 hours ago (3 children)
[–] sqw@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

you just add "do not put bugs in the code. review it as much as you need to." to the prompt.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Sadly I can't tell if this is a joke or not because I have met so many people who seriously believe things like this work. They are the ones who eventually get the most pissed when LLM messes up on them because they got the LLM to "promise" not to do the specific thing it ends up doing.

They generally evolve their superstitious ritual to something else that will eventually fail, like changing the wording, or making the LLM specifically include a phrase indicating a promise of quality. They also believe when the LLM "apologizes" and think that indicated self reflection and learning. Very few are prepared to accept that the LLM can go off the rails at unpredictable times and unpredictable circumstances, and their utility has to be monitored like a hawk unless the outcome really doesn't matter.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)