I feel that too :) With the license, you are right, and I like your stance of "expressed intent".

I like that you've started keeping your prompts in the repo [1]. Why have you deleted them, later on? What I find curious is how can something AI generated can be licensed AGPL?

[1]: https://github.com/c0m4r/kula/commit/ae3f8a8483c91fe8bd4ea2c...

Reminds me of the "Weird Al" Yankovic evergreen "Mission Statement": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyV_UG60dD4

From personal experience, SW that was developed with agent does not hit the road because:

a) learning and adapting is at first more effort, not less, b) learning with experiments is faster, c) experiencing the acceleration first hand is demoralising, d) distribution/marketing is on an accelerated declining efficiency trajectory (if you want to keep it human-generated) e) maintenance effort is not decelerating as fast as creation effort

Yet, I believe your statement is wrong, in the first place. A lot of new code is created with AI assistance, already and part of the acceleration in AI itself can be attributed to increased use of ai in software engineering (from research to planning to execution).

1999-2000, the company I worked with gave a smallish number of key users full read rights to the SAP minus HR, briefly after introducing SAP to the global supply chain of that company. The key users came from all orgs using SAP, basically every department had one or two key users.

I was part of this and "saw the light". We had such a great visibility into all the processes, it was unreal. It tremendously sped-up cross-org initiatives.

Today, I guess, only agents get that privilege.