bingo. I live in Toronto and i'm a contractor that is doing code reviews with a focus on LLMs for startups and other small tech firms. I'd say 9 out of 10 times my reports can be summed up as "this could have all been avoided if a team of devs had remained on staff" and then I fix it.

They'll keep trucking along with AI and then hiring people like me for a premium because in the long run it's still cheaper than having a team of 5+ devs on staff and that line will go up. the AI isn't improving anything, it's hindering them but it's still slightly cheaper than having humans on board. broken and delayed product be damned, their still saving a couple nickels.

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 hour ago

hey! I'm in Markham ... our company is trying to be AI first. We're having it set up a brand new project from scratch.

Instead of letting the devs talk about it and then using AI to build the code. They funnel the batch of tickets straight into the AI machine and we have to review the code afterwards.

It takes so long to review the code. Most devs don't like reading lots of Markdown files to get the assumptions onto a big project.

The guys pushing this seem to just negate the fact that we need to spot-check things and follows and things make sense.

They took all our PR feedback and just fed it back into AI and we have to do another gigantic PR review. It feels a bit silly.