I feel like these top down mandates miss the forest through the trees -- in isolation claude code is a speedup, like how sometimes WD40 is the right tool for the job. But when applying it to everything, you end up with a sticky mess.
For professional use-cases, targeted products are preferred, whether they be lubricants, penetrating oils, rust remover, etc.
"over 60% of our pull requests (PRs) are agent-assisted" is a pretty low bar these days.
The off the shelf tools (Claude Code/etc) are all good enough that basically every PR should probably be LLM assisted at this point.
It's good for them that they have made progress, but "assistance" is not really at the frontier of what people are trying to get to.
The real question for software engineering is: how can we get to the point where simple prompts get to production quality code without human intervention. Human review is still ok, but we want to get getting to the point where most PRs are one shot, or with the LLM proactively asking the questions that are necessary, not the human having to repeatedly re-review the same code multiple times for quality.
Of course after that the goal is taking the hands off the wheel entirely, just purely filing tickets.
So far I think we're mostly just waiting on model improvements or accepting that the code we get is garbage, but I would love to hear people's experiences taking their hands off the wheel in production settings.
They kept getting surprised by how many of their loans go unpaid on top of all that.
So they are lending to the riskiest consumers, and they kept underestimating the risk, though they might have fixed that. The past three quarters they have finally become profitable, but given their portfolio of risky consumer loans that are unsecured, any kind of economic downturn could really hurt them.
They aren’t really on their way out right now, but they are in a dangerous position if, say, some global economic event were to cause a massive economic shock…
Headline later: Affirm data breach exposes personal details and bank information of millions of users
In my experience, each single item on this list already is a major hurdle for AI agents. The unholy union of all of them together is something I couldn't personally be responsible for - period.
Working on that codebase - I'm sure - is already difficult and often frustrating. Having a horde of short-term-memory-only agents without any real institutional knowledge is a recipe for disaster. I'm sure the rollout looks great on paper, and long-term effects are - conveniently - not the scope of this article.
Or the window to get hooked is now? Or do they have an open model backup plan?
> We believe the companies that leap will stay ahead, the ones that wait will be leapt over.
FOMO is the same as last week.
Well I mean you could (and should) turn on 100% agent code-reviews, and that's a type of assistance.
The hard part is that most orgs never made disposable environments nor any meaningful local testing, so the ability to validate code doesn't break something indirectly (e.g. memory leak, hammer the prod DB, cache values with the wrong key, etc) isn't there. In my experience AI code has several subtle bugs and is deceptively dangerous (because it can look so competent in other ways).
There's ways to improve on this, but nobody ever wants to invest more in disposable dev environments, dev is always the wimpiest environment of them all.
you mandate and "solve" this in a few weeks over 1:N channels and measure on a metric that nobody even fully understands yet = someone getting paid to bullshit some metrics on agentic productivity to executives. i agree with other posters, 12 months until a dumpster fire of shit reveals itself.
FWIW, i think it is the future but not in the way that'd described here.
“Decide upfront” is a load of crap. I can write the “perfect” spec plan, but we always, always miss something or misunderstand something. Agents will follow a high confidence spec blindly because they think it’s the blessed pattern.
To me, it sure looks like they took a “best practice”, stuck it in the flow chart then demand everyone use it.
I see zero details about how they actually learned what their devs need, how they know devs are getting value out of this, and what problems devs are trying to solve with agentic tooling.
What works: starting with isolated internal tools where mistakes are recoverable, not customer-facing payment flows. Agents excel at boilerplate and test generation but need human guardrails for business logic. Affirm's one-week timeline sounds more like executive theater than genuine transformation. The 12-month check will be more telling than the announcement.
You seem to be speaking from what you’ve heard through social media and sheer ignorance.