You're definitely out of the line with such language.
And naive.
Your biggest error is thinking that:
1. there's quality software out there. It's definitely far from the industry standard, even in high budget big techs, far from it
2. that people opening the wallet care about software quality. good has been always better than perfect
3. that the average PR review has significant impact on code quality, clearly false by point 1.
4. that proper AI usage for doing adversarial reviews of plans and implementations won't catch by far more issues than the average pr out there nit picking coding styles but not even bothering to test the feature/branch
Thus I stand to my opinion. Quality PRs are too expensive nowadays and the engineers that will thrive will be the already great ones that will be enhanced by the tool, not companies shelling money on reviewing the average garbage MIT-bred leetcode blackbelt is slopping.
They will only involve core/critical code and libraries.
Don't bother my man. All of the commenters talk about the "bad code" AI writes as if the code that's out there in the world isn't also compete garbage.
Of course, everyone here is in the 99th percentile in ability, am I right?
The sheer number of people I'm meeting that say about trivial things "AI cant do that" is astonishing.
In all of that I'm not saying good engineering practices are bad, I'm speculating that the economics will push towards strong individuals soloing features at good code quality.
Bogging down strong contributors into reviewing code, now that there's more work to review in the first place might be not economically feasible unless the code is critical to the business.
You're definitely out of the line with such language.
And naive.
Your biggest error is thinking that:
1. there's quality software out there. It's definitely far from the industry standard, even in high budget big techs, far from it
2. that people opening the wallet care about software quality. good has been always better than perfect
3. that the average PR review has significant impact on code quality, clearly false by point 1.
4. that proper AI usage for doing adversarial reviews of plans and implementations won't catch by far more issues than the average pr out there nit picking coding styles but not even bothering to test the feature/branch
Thus I stand to my opinion. Quality PRs are too expensive nowadays and the engineers that will thrive will be the already great ones that will be enhanced by the tool, not companies shelling money on reviewing the average garbage MIT-bred leetcode blackbelt is slopping.
They will only involve core/critical code and libraries.