Most devs don't trust AI-generated code, but fail to check it anyway Talk about letting things go! Ninety-six percent of software developers believe AI-generated code isn't functionally correct, yet only 48 percent say they always check code generated with AI assistance before committing it. This conveniently self-validating statistic comes from Sonar, a company that sells code review and …
how to meet EU CRA if companies have no idea what the code does or is checked ? EU is going to block all AI assisted released software, or the law will be dead on arrival or totally ineffective before when goes into effect on 11 september 2026 ? How to put an EU mark on such products ? they just hire (pay) a consultant company to generate some kind of (false) assessment report ?
at what point do these LLM driven tools end up with model breakdown?
If at some point, say 70 percent of code is AI generated, won’t AI agent scraping tools be learning from AI generated content?
It’s probably a given that a lot of data to generate model data comes from github and the like. I’m sure stack overflow will have been slurped up by bots.
How much of the human generated code from those sources is just bad code? A significant percentage given my experience.
As humans generate less and less code, the source for LLM data is going to be AI generated.
What could possibly go wrong?
Unfortunately, the end result is much the same on the brain function of the devs ...
I can only 'crank' out 'crap' code because that is all I have ever seen and learnt from !!!
Devalue the devs by making them worse, then the 'AI' sells itself because 'AI' is 100% confident that its code is the 'best' !!!
This 'confidence' will, of course, convince the accountants who are believing the 'pitch' that 'AI' will solve all your problems cheaply !!!
Spiraling down to 'ameoba level intelligence' at hypersonic speeds ... all for the mighty Buck !!!
'Idiocracy' is still being used as a template AND NOT a REAL warning !!!
:)
I'd be happy if only accountants were the problem. My struggle is, when I'm forced to futilely explain to a colleague that they cannot simply trust what comes out of a GenAI.
In Idiocracy, at least, if I remember correctly, they did recognise that there was a problem and tried to find someone who could help. We're not there.
If your colleagues actually believe that GenAI works ... they are beyond hope and it is too late to try to explain !!!
Perhaps you need to demonstrate the quality of the code produced to them and your managers ... and the effort needed to correct it to be usable & supportable.
A basic 'Sales Pitch' vs 'Reality' demonstration !!!
Best of Luck !!!
:)
I would say from experience that the percentages correlate woth the levels of competence in software engineering; the 6% who are very experienced and can design and write good code quickly and know all the pitfalls, the 48% who are quite good but have less experience and the rest who are pretty junior. The 6% will be retiring soonish... we are on the verge of a crisis...
I would bet once the he 6% retire a goodly proportion of the 48% (the creme) will take an early mark and head for the same exit.
"we are on the verge of a crisis..." An understatement if the result is 0%/20%/46% ie normalized 0%/30%/70%
A third knowing just enough to cause real damage with remaining two thirds are too ignorant to know that they have already inflicted mayhem.
Aye. It's a grand time to be leaving the world… or waiting for the gangplank to be lowered for embarkation. ;)
Hey, if you want ai-generated code you get ai-generated code.
Let's say I take three hours to write something myself, then why should I have to spend six, seven, eight hours meticulously combing over every detail of your beloved ai-generated crap and build your frankenstein's ship of theseus?
I'll write the tests (if you even let me, that is), throw some lipstick on the pig, and that's it. That's what you get.
Your failure to compensate me properly and at least have some decency, with your "ai can do your job better than you can so beg for and be glad with the scraps I throw you and shut up" attitude, does not constitute a requirement to debase en devalue myself on my part.
Keep haggling, dear "leader".
Keep showing me who you really are.
I'd much rather treat you to the fruits of my labour with all the competency and knowledge that it entails but you get what you give.
Look, if you're a slop coder in the first place, why would you bother checking the AI written code? You're having the AI write code specifically because you're lazy, lack talent, and lack rigor. And suddenly you expect them to have all that for the verification phase?
'30% of people who drink drive don't use their seatbelts!' well gee what a surprise.
> "We are witnessing a fundamental shift in software engineering where value is no longer defined by the speed of writing code, but by the confidence in deploying it,"
(Dunno about anyone else, but if I'm not confident in the code I'm not deploying! But this may simply be a by-product of the beard and remaining hair now providing camouflage in the snow.)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
