this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
318 points (98.5% liked)
Programmer Humor
30222 readers
532 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I have a visceral "AI" sensor that triggers when I see these:
"Rust Implementation (v2)"
"Performance Benchmarks (Validated)"
Human beings don't self-validate explicitly like that. AI loves doing it.
You generate code, there's a bug, you ask for a fix, your AI of choice will always output with:
*** Fix build issue ***
*** End fix ***
and then call it "Version 2 (Validated)".
Sometimes it's more subtle, but you can feel it, it loves adding "confirmed", "working", "validated".
π: mission acquired
π: bugs squashed
π: code validated
π: congratulations on this exquisite piece of software
βοΈ: ready to do more!
"I'm confident in my solution."
Alarm bells.
This comment has been confirmed and validated by an actual human being π
My sensor is much simpler. If I see emoji in headings or bulleted lists, I assume it's shit. It might be AI slop, or it might just be kids getting overexcited with the little pictures, but both deserve suspicion and scrutiny.
If a bunch of the emoji don't even make sense it can get in the bin.
Ahhh idk, I saw a lot of genuine repos do emojis, at least for headings. Even before LLMs.
I like them 'cause with the right amount, it makes a README easier to parse when quickly scrolling over it.
My changelog generation tools output emojis because our lives are too short to not use π
As an ancient husk of a person, it all looks crack-addled to me. I don't really see how you can parse out headings from emoji because their usage isn't consistent.
I like putting the little pictures in my readmes sometimes. In my biologically generated repositories. Please don't discriminate against neat little pictures you can just put in text π.
me too!
admittedly imo they are being overused now though
Your whimsy hurts me
This comment is so true πππ
πͺ
I have a project with a bunch of compose files that define the services I self host. I "deploy" the project by sshing into my server and doing "git pull" which means I'm often making changes that don't get tested before committing to source control. As a result I have long chains of commits like:
And now I'm wondering if I've been an llm this whole time
Let me introduce you to Ansible
Why not just edit the YAML directly on the server via a command-line text editor or SSHFS and then push from there when it works?
Make your changes in a new branch and rebase/squash when you push it to main.
This also means modifying your
git pullcommand to pull the correct branch. A small change perhaps, but may be harder than just committing to main lol.I had a similar problem with GitHub actions, it was hard to test without messing up the main repo history.
No the AI would have called it fixed, βproduction-ready,β committed, and pushed after the first refactor.
Also the repo image