this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2026
891 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
89355 readers
3473 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I never said speed was all that mattered. But from my experience, and my other friends in the industry, it is possible to achieve speed while maintaining quality. security, and maintainability. Because these are all things that the AI can look for too. Just look at how many vulnerabilities AI is finding nowadays. Just like any other product manager, you can bring up concerns, ask the AI to look into them, and validate the AI's claims. Just like you would manage a team of engineers. Which is of course still faster than writing everything yourself.
If all you ask the AI to do is produce lines of code, that's all it will do. But AI workflows can be far more complex than that.
The quote is talking about how the CEO is scoffing at an engineer asking for a few days for pentesting. None of that has to do with using or not using AI for coding. Doesn't matter who wrote the code, the management of a privacy first company looking to cut corners on testing for buggy code is a no no for their customers.
Without the whole slack context, the pentesting comment might have been part of a whole chain of comments trying to discredit AI, and the CEO is trying to push for AI. I wouldn't jump to saying the CEO is against pentesting in general until I had more information
What part of insulting people that wants to take it slow makes sense as a response to a chain of comments discrediting AI? You're twisting your whole body trying to invent hypotheticals that doesn't even make sense.
Why are you making yourself look foolish to defend a company you have no financial or personal connection to? Unless you actually do.
Recall that I already mentioned that his comments seemed aggressively out of touch. Insulting your engineers is a bad look.
However, I'm saying that he isn't necessarily against pentesting, which is what some comments seem to be thinking. I would want to read the whole context to see if that's what he really believes.