Actually it's fully measurable but no one who's making these claims ever seems to want to measure it, nor share data in a public way so that others could measure it.
What we do see publicly is OSS projects overrun with poor submissions, for example.
Comparing hobbyist vibe code that goes into OSS projects vs what large companies are doing with infinite token budgets is an apples to oranges comparison.
It is like saying "no one can produce a viable CPU because I can't tape one out in my garage."
>Or he's just giving a sane take, one that most people in the Bay Area have by now.
I don't know what the Bay Area note is supposed to mean in the context of the whole post - unless you want to reinforce that it surely means that it's a sane take... In which case, I'm not certain the non-Bay readers would agree that it comes from an unbiased culture.
People started depending on GitHub more. Do people really think it was more reliable when it was a sprawling RoR app in 2010? (Not that there’s anything wrong with RoR; people just didn’t expect such high uptime back then.)
Lots of tech companies are doing just fine with purely AI written code at this point.
Saying that the quality is getting worse in some immeasurable way (while incidents remain the same) is literally unfalsifiable.