Every claim below was made in this piece, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.
Their wordsThe best AI dev is the one with the best ƒ(code), assuming equal access to equally capable, cheap, and fast LLMs. Everything else about an AI dev is undifferentiated.
Their wordsHuman code review and slow CI will start becoming obsolete/irrelevant in a world with AI devs with better-than-~80%ile-human ƒ(code)s.
Their wordsI believe today’s SOTA LLMs, used by an AI dev with an ƒ(code) that is feasible to build today (but well beyond what anyone has actually built yet), are sufficiently capable to automate coding way beyond what most people think possible.
Their wordsAnd since the best AI dev is the one with the best ƒ(code), and the best ƒ(code) comes from having the most comprehensive context and using it smartly, that means that context is the most important part of an AI dev.
Their wordsAny AI built by a vendor that only integrates with that vendor’s own tools will be very limited compared to one that can slurp up info from all the tools you use.
Keep reading
The other pieces are the ones whose claims are worded most like this one's. That measures language, not agreement: they may argue the opposite.