Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
No sawdust is bad. But it's also bad if you cut all your boards into sawdust. Completely. Obliterated. No useful output, only sawdust.

% of AI suggestions accepted vs. edited is also a BS metric that Anthropic et. al. like to push, similar to LoC, because they're large numbers and large numbers must be good, right?

Well guess what, I have auto-accept on and then adjust after it's "done". And I do it by telling it what changes to make and those have auto-accept on as well. That's quite a high "accept" rate, by definition. But in reality it may have churned on 50% of the lines it generated and auto-accepted first.

> % of AI suggestions accepted vs. edited is also a BS metric

I disagree. It’s a valuable metric if you are building an agent / skill infra layer.

Think of it like error rate on your API. Green metric does not mean your system is healthy, but if it’s red you have an issue you definitely need to fix.

Your example scenario is detectable in the non-naive implementation anyway; the o11y layer (usually OTel these days) tracks the trajectories, links them to the diff, and attributes each hunk as coming from the session or not.

loading story #48252242