What I hate the most is people vomiting AI slop communicating with others. I have teammates who decided that an agent producing a wall of text summarizing changes in a pull request instead of a simple "LGTM" is a good idea. I have teammates who talk using AI almost exclusively (you can see a small tag "Sent using Claude" or "Sent using Cursor" under their messages)
Posing a well considered, concise and precise question only to get a wall of Claudeisms in response from a colleague is always demoralizing. Then you have to play the guessing game of 'is this detail in the response true, or did Claude make it up for them?'
> I have teammates who talk using Claude almost exclusively.
If somebody told that humans are a form of creature which can forego their most important and powerful capabilities just for convenience, I'd call the person saying that batshit insane, but here we are...
a teammate who exclusively writes slop PRs and copy/paste LLM responses to slack has demonstrated they can be replaced by an LLM integration to slack and github.
If your company cares enough/will allow it, make a written policy that authors are responsible for their code and they must still meet whatever quality bar existed at your company pre-LLMs. It's awkward, but I've seen friends whose companies have started to make it normal to say "I'm not reviewing this, it was clearly written by AI" the same way pre-LLMs you could also say "I'm not reviewing this because it's 5k LoC and needs to be split up into smaller reviews".
Then if people send you slop you can either point them to the guidelines or, if they don't stop, report them for violating workplace rules and make them suffer.
