> ... More features and more code as fast as machinelly possible.

i am going to quote that a lot...

Depends on your incentives, most people and companies are measuring Lines of codes and features as the metric so ofc it will increase it, but AI can create small KISS applications. It might have a little difficulties in doing so sometimes because it sometimes likes to overengineer things but I have to wonder how much of it is because it is RLHF'd to solve questions at any costs in terms of lines of code rather than training it in solving it in KISS principles. Also I wonder how AI will perform if we explicitly treat KISS as the only principle and have checks running on it and have it discard all the code which wouldn't follow KISS principle if it doesn't follow the principle.

Software that does less is easier to understand and reason about, and typically requires less code. Less opportunity for bugs to appear.

Maybe, when they build a pomodoro timer, people will consider the possibility that the entirety of a browser engine as well as 30 000 javascript dependencies from random unvetted sources introduces unnecessary complexity and a practically infinitely fractal attack surface.

that people will finally start solving issues by simplifying the software rather than generating even more edge cases.

A lot of these bugs are in rarely exercised code paths that probably shouldn't have been written into the software in the first place.

Systems should be made as simple as possible, and no simpler.

That doesn't mean every simple system solves the problems we intend for it to solve. It means that all else being equal, we should prefer parsimony.

The U.S. government could have required all new software for any government-procured system to be written memory-safe languages, thus making it ubiquitous. This could have been phased in slowly with a few years of on-ramp time to allow for industry to acquire the relevant skills.