> How are people getting this "waste of time not to use AI" and "generates 99% of my code" level of code quality?
They don't know what n+1 problem is and they don't know about long-term maintainability.
They don't know what n+1 problem is and they don't know about long-term maintainability.
overall software quality seems largely unchanged
OTOH, if someone insists on writing bad code—even after being advised otherwise—then they should expect to be out of a job.
Doesn't seem like "terminated junior developer" is the level of quality we should be accepting or promoting for AI.
In any case, the point is that low quality code shouldn't be promoted as the acceptable goal for AI.