I edited this with AI to try and help the reader (Austin)
I’m curious if your cynicism and general attitude toward AI-driven workflows is still the same.
I hear you loud and clear on the frustration and disillusionment. I’m wondering if that was a momentary perspective from a different point in time, or if you still feel the same way today.
For example, if someone is using agentic AI to build something, they may not know what they don’t know. If the AI is making things up, and they don’t have the experience to catch it, they may genuinely have no idea they’re being misled. Feedback like yours is valuable because it points out those issues directly.
To be fair to them, they may not know. To be fair to you, there is no repo to review. That’s a loop of death we all know exists with these AI workflows.
My questions are:
- Would you be willing to create or contribute to a standard feedback document that outlines:
- What developers need to show
- Where they need to show it
- Common do’s and don’ts
This would prevent the same conversations from happening over and over again.
- If you’re reviewing projects, repos, and codebases on your own time, that’s work. What would reasonable compensation look like in USD or ICP?
- Could there be a system where developers in training contribute toward reviews, educational materials, or even donations to support ICDevs while receiving meaningful feedback on real projects?
- The fact that you’re willing to review repos is exciting. Many of us are genuinely trying to learn. Looking at projects and providing thoughtful feedback takes time, and simply responding with “bro, your code sucks” doesn’t help anyone improve.
For newer developers, especially those using agentic workflows, it seems like there could be value in reviewing toy projects and explaining mistakes so people can gradually learn healthy development practices. Over time, that could lead to a hybrid approach where people understand both manual development and AI-assisted workflows.
- Would there be value in creating a dedicated space for this kind of learning, even if participation required paying a fee? I’m not sure how it would be structured technically or legally, but I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts.
Personally, I like the idea of supporting what you’re building. What interests me most is creating educational opportunities that help people learn how to feed themselves long term rather than simply handing them a single meal.
Your time deserves consideration too.
These are the “sniff sniff your butt” questions I’d want answered before making a final move and deciding where I invest my time, energy, and ICP.
I also have a few questions for my legal advisor. Speaking only for myself, this may simply be the direction I need to go so I can stop contributing to the nonsense and focus on actually learning.
I totally understand this is a lot to ask given the size of my stake. Still, if it’s possible for me and others to receive that kind of valuable feedback, I think it would be worth it.
Not on Discord. Not on Twitter. Just a basic forum or Discourse-style environment where the information is searchable, archived, and accessible.
I also think the output could have value beyond the individual receiving the feedback. For example, if someone submits an NFT project and you identify a series of issues, that review could become a written case study or recorded lecture that newer developers can learn from later.
Maybe that’s an ideological fantasy, but if even part of it is possible, I’d happily direct my rewards and votes toward supporting something like that.
At that point, my investment wouldn’t just be financial. It would feel like I received an education from it as well. That would completely change my perspective and give me hope that I got as much value out of the experience as I would have from spending another $10,000 on higher education.