> significant lines of code per human-landed diff

Claude would be proud.

That said, code reviews have never worked well, and it's a weird argument for wanting to preserve them.

Pairing is great and under-utilized. On one hand it's a hard sell to managers (let's use two people to do one person's job) and from the developer's point of view, it's intense and exhausting.

What's a weird argument? Did you read this article?

She's arguing that most code reviews aren't necessary. Some can be automated if they are deterministically predictable (eg. formatting, lint, standardization changes). Others should be reviews of design before the coding phase.

She gives a few specific examples of when code reviews should be maintained.