Nah, there's no evidence of reduced quality. If anything it's the reverse. I've seen AI code review tools be tremendously effective at catching defects which otherwise would have shipped.

In the DORA group's reporting on AI-assisted software engineering, they indeed state that across industries, quality goes UP with the use of AI assistants like Claude and others.

Moreover, in my experience helping businesses on this topic; They never defined or made measurable what quality meant in the first place. Then when they finally do figure it out, it turns out that the average repository is a total disappointment in terms of absolute quality.

Same for me. I have not yet successfully used an LLM to generate code to produce a feature, though to be fair, it might just be because I don't have the patience to go back and forth with it (will readily admit that I am using it wrong).

Also, while some code review comments are just plain wrong, LLMs did produce some damn good comments, on the same level as a different senior engineer might note had they taken the time to study the code carefully.

Same here, it's been catching a lot of bugs that would have been very hard to trace or discover, often just in the process of doing something else.