This seems to assume more code shipped equals more work done. I am still not convinced that this is necessarily the case. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it is not. You mentioned that reviews are now the bottleneck and that your familiarity with the code has decreased. That tradeoff might eat into the parallelization gains over time.
Definitely not - the biggest risk with this increased speed is going full-bore in the wrong direction. A product mindset (and a critical eye to architecture) matters more now than ever.
Most people hyping their AI use mention the short-term gains without taking into account how it affects overall long-term success. We are creatures of convenience.
>I notice another trend were a lot of AI naysayers haven't really spent a ton of time getting intimately familiar with AI.
I don't think that's really true, it's more your feels than anything. I've noticed this thing where everyone that's using AI think nobody else is using AI, or at least not the cool way they are doing it. It's typically nonsense.
I've been using AI for quite a while, personally and professionally, and I can already see the clusterfuck it's causing. I still don't let it work on my important personal projects, but for simple tools and websites, sure. At work we're told to use AI exclusively to code, and it's already causing problems - the AI just endlessly applies bandaid after bandaid and it's turned the code to spaghetti. Nobody even reads the code, the people above just tell us to approve it and ship it. I'm looking for a new job because I already know this isn't going to produce the long-term success they are expecting. All it is doing is making it more expensive to write software, without the knowledge of how the code works, and if you can't already understand how that looks in the future, well... I don't know what to tell you.
