The unwritten thing is that if you need seniors to review every single change from junior and mid-level engineers, and those engineers are mostly using Kiro to write their CRs, then what stops the senior from just writing the CRs with Kiro themselves?

I am not in that specific meeting but it made me chuckle that a weekly ops meeting will somehow get media attention. It's been an Amazon thing forever. Wait until the public learns about CoEs!

My favorite is seeing thought leader-style posts in LinkedIn by coworkers whose writing style I am familiar with, clearly written by an LLM.

> you could reduce headcount via attrition which is better in some ways

I don't think reducing via attrition is better for the company, for the employees 100%, but attrition would be your people moving to other companies and retirement. It means that you are effectively bleeding your people with options (usually above average) and those with the most experience in favor of "the rest".

My pet peeve with AI is that it tends to work better in codebase where humans do well and for the same reason.

Large orchestration package without any tests that relies on a bunch of microservices to work? Claude Code will be as confused as our SDEs.

This in turns lead to broader effort to refactor our antiquated packages in the name of "making it compatible with AI" which actually means compatible with humans.