[moosedev]

Feeling this too. And AI is making it "worse".

Reviewing human code and writing thoughtful, justified, constructive feedback to help the author grow is one thing - too much of this activity gets draining, for sure, but at least I get the satisfaction of teaching/mentoring through it.

Reviewing AI-generated code, though, I'm increasingly unsure there's any real point to writing constructive feedback, and I can feel I'll burn out if I keep pushing myself to do it. AI also allows less experienced engineers to churn out code faster, so I have more and more code to review.

But right now I'm still "responsible" for "code quality" and "mentoring", even if we are going to have to figure out what those things even mean when everyone is a 10x vibecoder...

Hoping the stock market calms down and I can just decide I'm done with my tech career if/when this change becomes too painful for dinosaurs like me :)

[acedTrex]

I could not agree more.

> AI also allows less experienced engineers to churn out code faster, so I have more and more code to review

This to me has been the absolute hardest part of dealing with the post LLM fallout in this industry. It's been so frustrating for me personally I took to writing my thoughts down in a small blog humerously titled

"Yes, I will judge you for using AI...",

in fact I say nearly this exact sentiment in it.

https://jaysthoughts.com/aithoughts1

[moosedev]

Thanks, I like your framing in terms of the impact on "trust".

> Generating more complex solutions that are possibly not understood by the engineer submitting the changes.

I'd possibly remove "possibly" :-)