He told me that features he generated using Claude Code ended up crashing their product on two different occasions. His boss told him that if it happened one more time, he’d be fired. “I’ve never had quality issues like this before in my career.” The problem is that code produced by an AI agent looks reasonable, but can contain ‘hard-to-spot bugs’ that end up causing major problems. As a result, you should carefully review your agent’s output, but this is difficult. As the engineer told me, it’s “famously hard” to understand code you didn’t write yourself, so this extra step becomes “easy to just blow it off (especially when we are all trying to ‘10x’ our velocity).” Soon, systems start to break. “The coding harnesses are useful and make life as a developer easier,” he summarized, “but they also encourage laziness.” In response to these issues, this disillusioned engineer has returned to largely programming by hand.

In truth, nate relied heavily on teams of human workers—primarily located overseas—to manually process transactions in secret, mimicking what users believed was being done by automation

This weakness became impossible to ignore earlier this month, when Anita Natasha Akida (popularly called Tasha), a Nigerian reality TV star, called out Grok. People had been prompting the bot to generate edited versions of her photos, and Grok responded with humiliating and inappropriate images. Grok replied and apologized to her. It promised never to edit her images again. Minutes later, it broke that promise and generated another image mocking her.

misled investors by exploiting the promise and allure of AI technology to build a false narrative about innovation that never existed. This type of deception not only victimizes innocent investors