For decades, I've said that if you're doing long, boring, repetitive work in software development, then you're doing it wrong: You should extract reusable code, or automate it.
Current marketing of Generative AI as "AI" (seemingly intentionally) confuses: There is a lot of non-Generative-AI and statistical methods and heuristics that are still useful and good for large dataset initial analysis. And have been since long before the Generative AI fad.
“Each [programmer] could be functioning more efficiently, with greater satisfaction, if he and his manager would only learn to look upon the programmer as a human being, rather than another one of the machines.” — Gerald Weinberg, 1971
If a code review were being done as a *discussion between peers*, then it would be far more appropriate to say, "Hmmm… I was thinking I would have done it this other way. But are there advantages to this way?" And that opens up a discussion. A text comment, marked as a required "todo," blocking merge, is a challenge, not a discussion.
During discussion, the reviewer might agree that what the submitter did was the best choice.
It seems unfortunate that, as an industry, we've largely fallen into the rut that "code review" is "leaving comments on a pull request, some of which block the merge."
The original code review research, which justifies the practice, was a *DISCUSSION* of the code being reviewed. Not asynchronous socially disconnected text comments.
"According to information obtained by LBCI, initial reports suggest the pager server was compromised, leading to the installation of a script that caused an overload. This likely resulted in the overheating of the lithium battery, which then exploded."
The batteries used in phones and laptops can be overloaded. They may catch on fire and possibly explode. This can be done by software, on the cheaper relatively modern devices.
Doesn't surprise me at all that Israel might have done this.
"At least nine people, including a girl, have been killed and 2,750 wounded in simultaneous explosions of pagers used by Hezbollah members across Lebanon."
Yes, there's a legitimate concern that the Russian government *could* possibly influence or coerce them. But that does not seem to have happened. (At least, not yet.)