Comment by molteanu

AI may expand the effectiveness of engineers, especially experienced ones, without doing much for efficiency or velocity.

If that’s the case the industry hasn’t considered how it will adapt to that. It’s not even in the conversation.

> we've let the doors wide open for all the food to enter. Junk or otherwise, without, from our part, any knowledge of what is healthy and what not. Tremendous amount of choices, little, close to zero knowledge about what is good and what is not

love this analogy, thank you !

Its almost like the bottleneck of software engineering "at scale" is human communication not "programming speed"

I have the opposite experience.

Company offered Copilot subscriptions org-wide early, as well as Augment, and Slack integration for LLM's with internal docs and discussion contexts.

Copilot has been useful (I was part of the early access and used it +1 year prior to public launch, though) but I think Augment has really seen the biggest impact in our org.

Several small features and a lot of refactors have been done entirely through Augment.

Personally, I'm a bigger fan of Claude Code, but it's not covered by our org so I only get my $20/mo use out of it.

We are currently in the „AI experimentation phase“, by 2026, latest, we will be a first class AI first company -the CPTO said so.

Teams are ranked by AI usage now, making me ask claude code how it slept every morning.

You better brace yourself, because as such a company we will run circles around you.

AI helps write the code but it doesn't help with the "process" large engineering orgs and stuck in.

I think that's why we see small teams and indie hackers really utilize it. They aren't bogged down by the beauracracy of code changed in a large org.

Big tech is looking for a miracle cure without looking at the root problem (too much process, overhead, cruft). Current AI tools are also far less useful in large codebases than they are in greenfield projects.