Loading today's brief
Covered by Simon Willison; analysis only, with no primary source or newsroom yet.
We think "did a human read the code?" is an imprecise proxy for "what could go wrong with this change, and which check—automated or human—is the right one to catch it?" Asking that question also changed when review happens. Before, review was a gate at the end of the road: write the code, open a PR, wait for your colleague. Now, review runs continuously, more like spellcheck while you write. Most changes have been reviewed and fixed by Claude at least once before a human is asked to look. This catches most routine mistakes, and saves team attention for higher-level questions and scrutiny. —…
Not summarised — no summariser is configured, so the text above is the source's own excerpt.
| Expert analysis | 9 |
| Age | -5.3 |
| Content type | 2 |
| Not yet corroborated | -2 |
| Total | 3.7 |