These are very good points, even goes over the things I personally thought LLMs might be actually suited for.

I want to stay the tiniest speck of optimistic that we can at least get something good out of this all, but understand that it's all idealism based on little to even maybe nothing.

Though maybe it's more "Can all this suffering at least have a silver lining?" Line of thinking dominating my subconscious as a burnt out jaded 30somethin'.

You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

It just lays more bare what the people up top care about. Most devs eventually learn this but they are often somewhat insulated as they are left to their own devices to build a product via a given framework or standard. But the C-suite has never cared about code quality or security unless a big customer or investor cares about it. The C-suite is focused on making money, especially through disciplining labor. They are very happy with the worst thing you've ever seen so long as it appears to function and neither big customers nor investors are complaining about it. Tech is usually treated as a cost center, it is something to minimize and fulfills a purpose that they would rather contract out.

These are folks with big egos and little education so they also think they know enough about the topic to manipulate their workers and discipline as needed. This has never been a problem for them before except when it comes to tech and how much they have to pay their workers, as there is limited supply. They are now having a great time attempting discipline that was otherwise difficult for them to achieve, so this is a double-whammy of standard labor discipline plus scratching a long-held itch in profit maximization. It doesn't even have to work, it just has to fulfill those basic criteria from earlier.

In large part this is because there is a substantial disconnect between production and profit, the actual product being sold and how money is made is often two or three degrees removed from "we made $x sales and had $y costs" that the C-suite can just tank four companies in a row and still make out like bandits - so long as they please the big customers and investors.

I would say the people on my team are about 3x more productive than before. Of course, they immediately cut our team by 2/3rds, so...

It's less accurate than copy/pasting shit off Stack Overflow, the thing we used to say was the sign of a bad programmer. Everyone using it is miserable, and nobody using it has actually delivered the results they keep saying they're getting (it's been 6 months since you all said you're 100x more effective, where's the 50 years worth of new software, AI bros?)

I dunno that wasn't my experience in the last 6 months or so. 2 years ago yeah it was basically this but nowadays I can get the thing to do some medium complexity work on our codebase and it's pretty much gonna get it right like 95% of the time with maybe some tiny code quality reduction in the form of some duplicated code or such but the thing is pretty much going to work.

Also I built a personal project with it that I wanted to do for a while but never got around to it and it pretty much did it as I wanted it. Granted it was a lot of back and forth and lots of debugging/testing passes but in the end it actually works. Not sure what the overall code quality is but the overall project structure makes sense and the little code I did look seemed solid enough.