The productivity improvements speak for themselves. Over time, those who can use ai well and those who cannot will be rewarded or penalized by the free market accordingly.
Sometime the result is not great, sometimes it requires manual updates, sometimes it just goes into a wrong direction and we just discard the proposal. The good thing is you can initiate such a large change, go get a coffee, and when you're back you can take a look at the changes.
Anyway, overall those tools are pretty useful already.
I've been at it multiple decades. TC $1M+. Forever beginner I guess.
https://youtu.be/1OzxYK2-qsI a 6-12% increase in pull requests per developer per month.
"But those diffs are AI slop and rework" you will object. Oh well, I tried.
Homeopathy works for sure. Placebo works. There are many studies confirming that.
It doesn't matter if you're using AI or not, just like it never mattered if you were using C or Java or Lisp, or using Emacs or Visual Studio, or using a debugger or printf's, or using Git or SVN or Rational ClearCase.
What really matters is in the end is, what you bring to market, and what your audience thinks of your product.
So use all the AI you want. Or don't use it. Or use it half the time. Or use it for the hard stuff, but not the easy stuff. Or use it for the easy stuff, but not the hard stuff. Whatever! You can succeed in the market with AI-generated product; you can fail in the market with AI-generated product. You can succeed in the market with human-generated product; you can fail in the market with human-generated product.