> Refusing the vet AI output is the kiss of death to velocity.

The usual rejoinder I've seen is that AI can just rewrite your whole system when complexity explodes. But I see at least two problems with that.

AI is impressively good at extracting intent from a ball of mud with tons of accidental complexity, and I think we can expect it to continue improving. But when a system has a lot of inherent complexity, and it's poorly specified, the task is harder.

The second is that small, incremental, reversible changes are the most reliable way to evolve a system, and AI doesn't repeal that principle. The more churn, the more bugs — minor and major.

> The usual rejoinder I've seen is that AI can just rewrite your whole system when complexity explodes.

Live and even offline data transformation and data migration without issues are still difficult problems to solve even for humans. It requires meticulous planning and execution.

A rewrite has to either discard the previous data or transform or keep the data layer intact across versions which means more and more tangled spaghetti accumulated over rewrites.