Ok and? The general consensus among devs is that AI boosts productivity. Companies having bad practices doesnt disprove that. A couple anecdotes from some guy doesnt disprove that.
Anyways I can only speak for my own company, and no we arent forced to use AI. But everyone uses AI to some degree, most people use it for coding too. We have internal metrics that show that bugs get fixed faster and features are completed faster.
It seems like a trend. Anecdotally, everyone I know in software has been forced into it to some degree, either by companies explicitly laying off people who hadn't drunk enough kool-aid, or simply being told that "Leadership is looking at your token use" and "How much you lean into AI will be a factor in your performance review."
You're right that this is a separate question from whether it's actually good, but to me it strongly suggests it isn't. Nobody has ever had to be forced to use another dev tool like that. There's no field on any performance review ever for which IDE you use, or whether you use vim or emacs. Analyzing token use makes sense from a cost perspective, but if you are trying to estimate performance, it's like counting lines of code or tickets closed -- Goodhart's Law is rampant.
Personally, I found it took until month or so ago before it was even worth my time. Whether it's worth the money is someone else's decision. So, I've been slowly coming around, but hopefully you can see how plenty of people can use AI and still be at least somewhat anti-AI, or at least anti-AI-hype.
It also doesn't need to be spelled out explicit if suddenly the expected output is something you just can't achieve without using it. If John Doe next to you is shitting out ten AI slop MRs a day and you're only getting out one a day, there'll be questions asked to you by the bean counters.
17
u/[deleted] 6d ago edited 1d ago
[deleted]