the paradox is that once you're advanced enough to know what security concerns are worth your time, you probably have already internalized this.
I think the devs who are dutifully reviewing the AI for pixel-pushing tasks simply do not trust the AI at all, and would probably be happier and just as productive not using it. you need a baseline level of trust to use the tool effectively.
I find use out of 'em everyday. what ARE you missing? why am I tasked to let you know? go find out.
(to me, it isn't about producing the right test -- I could think of many scenarios AI has enabled me to move faster on than I ever could without. if you don't have those scenarios, I don't know why you'd fabricate them just to prove or disprove a theory about the usefulness of something that is, well, not useful to you.)
right, because grabbing a tool reluctantly and spinning up something you could easily do by hand gives you all the insights you need to write a blog post. what could go wrong?
"I even wrote an app for it so that I could integrate my music like list from YouTube music so the AI would understand what music I like. I believed that music somehow communicates feeling that words cannot and perhaps the model would be able to intuit this from its training data."
eh, the part about "the only thing between prod and an off-script model is a human reading a diff" -- you realize that humans are also very often off-script, and reading the diff is what we've done for many years as oversight?