I do work in software, and my main focus is on code review, as we work with money, and things have happened due to many factors.

I DO NOT want any more work being done. Fuck that. It's hard reviewing 'normal' amount of code, multiplying it will backfire horrendously.

I do not need people not being able to figure out their bugs. It's the most important part of the job, and not being able to fix it quickly costs us a lot.

If you need to fix something in a library you don't understand... maybe you should review it before using? There are situations when it's not possible, usually in low risk fields, frontends and such, but even then, we (IT in general) produce so much shit for no real gain. And we need LESS of it, not more.

Everyone I work with that uses it is worse at their job than before they started using it, and I've lost the ability to teach them how to actually do good work because telling the c-suite they're 10x now (even though they're producing only slightly more code and more issues) makes the c-suite happy. I could believe that some people have made small improvements to their workflows but its obvious to anyone competent that it's not as big as an improvement as they'd have you believe and the vast majority is just people getting addicted to the slot machine, deskilling, and creating inferior output.

it’s not useful for programming and it makes code more verbose, poorly structured, and requires too many attempts to get a mildly useful block.

but using it as a tool as a professional can very much improve your work and how quickly you do things.

Maybe it's just my 20 yoe, but that has so far not been my experience with it. It is improving, but definitely not there yet. Even standard boiler plate I can typically bang out faster than asking the AI to do it and then needing to double check it's work because it somehow still manages to screw that up occasionally. Sometimes it does manage to be better than one of the juniors, but using it that way also cuts the legs out from under the career development pipeline which will result in an intermediate and senior dev drought down the road.

It's clearly a controversial thing to say on the fediverse, but everyone must realize that AI is another tool - a sometimes faulty, sometimes great tool. A professional can use it well, a careless person can use it carelessly. But it is a tool that can help in certain cases. It's a nuanced thing, which many people unfortunately have trouble accepting. It has flaws, yes. It also has benefits. This shouldn't be controversial to say.

That of course doesn't guarantee that providing that tool must be profitable. It may well be that providing AI models is just too expensive to actually make sense, at least as it is right now.