Do you actually trust AI generated code you haven't personally reviewed line by line

[NeonPhantom]

With how good AI coding assistants have gotten, I'm curious how many people here are actually reading and understanding every line an AI generates before shipping it versus just running the tests, seeing green checkmarks, and moving on with your day trusting the output implicitly

My own honest answer depends heavily on the stakes involved, a quick script to reformat some data I'll happily accept without reading closely, but anything touching authentication, payment processing, or user data gets read line by line regardless of how confident the tool sounded generating it

The genuinely tricky part is that AI generated code often looks completely correct on the surface, proper syntax, sensible variable names, comments that read as though someone thoughtful wrote them, which makes subtle logic errors or security issues significantly harder to spot compared to obviously sloppy human written code that at least signals it needs a closer look

There's also a real skill atrophy worry buried in all this, if you're consistently accepting AI generated code without deeply understanding why it works, you're not building the same kind of debugging instincts you'd build writing everything yourself from scratch, and that instinct is exactly what you need the day something actually breaks in production

Curious whether people have actually been burned by this yet, a bug that slipped through specifically because the code looked plausible enough that nobody looked closely, versus people who've had consistently positive experiences and think this whole concern is overblown at this point

[ForumGremlin]

Got burned exactly like this a few months back, AI generated a database query that looked completely correct and passed every test we had, turned out to have a subtle race condition under concurrent load that only showed up in production under real traffic

[HeartbreakKidStuart26]

The looks correct on the surface problem is the single biggest risk with AI generated code specifically, human written bad code tends to at least look messy or uncertain, AI output is confidently formatted regardless of whether the underlying logic is actually sound

[IronWarden]

Security specifically is where I refuse to relax at all regardless of how routine the task seems, seen too many examples of AI generated code introducing textbook vulnerabilities that would never have made it past a human reviewer paying real attention

[GlobalOliver15]

Skill atrophy is real and I've noticed it in myself, my instinct for spotting an off by one error used to be much faster before I started accepting AI suggestions for that kind of routine logic without thinking it through myself first

[Jade]

I read everything touching money or auth line by line without exception, but for internal tooling and one off scripts I've relaxed a lot, the stakes calculation feels like the right framework for deciding how much scrutiny any given piece of code actually deserves

[SingularityNodeKettle]

Tests passing gives false confidence more than people want to admit, tests only catch what you thought to test for, an AI can absolutely produce code that passes every test you wrote while still containing a real logic flaw nobody anticipated

[PhotonBurst17]

Honestly think the discipline required to properly review AI output is harder to maintain than writing the code yourself in the first place, human nature says stop scrutinizing something the moment it looks plausible and the tests are green