As a software automation test engineer is hard not to ask this question: Who tests the code written by AI? The new development cycle that we are seeing pushed by management without technical understanding is the following: developers writes code with AI, AI writes tests, AI tests AI, humans gets called when production breaks. And believe me, it brakes in Production. I've just witnessed such cases at my company, I saw it happening at my brother's company and also in many other instances. So why does this happen? Well, it happens because management and companies are riding the AI narrative without fully understand it. That and neither having the technical oversight well before AI. The perfect combination for bad things to happen.
To go to the extreme, I could compare such cases with letting someone drive that doesn't have a driving license. He starts the car, maybe starts moving and you hope it will sort it out as you driving along in the same car. That's wishful thinking if you didn't know and that means giving control and letting some machine decide for you, even if it doesn't have the skills to do it. That like being kamikaze if you ask me. But some people don't care...or what I believe they just don't know or don't understand. You could argue that ignorance is a bliss. But I would rather not be ruled by blind people (metaphorically speaking).
Just to give you a real example that happened these days: American company, aggressive AI narrative in order not to lose the train, most of the devs doing vibe coding and many changes commited for a Production release. New version pushed to Production and for about two weeks nothing worked anymore. All was critical, everyone turned to my brother for help (I should be modest, but he's a plain genius developer/architect) and he did fixes for about two weeks to make things work again. Not a story, but a real case.
A more specific example. The developer had a change request and he implemented that by changing few lines of code in a class. As an experiment he tried to achieve the same by using AI and vibe coding. The result? More than 50 classes affected, some of them not even related to the change. While the requirements specs might have been achieved, if that code would have been committed it would have introduced a lot of risks and probably bugs.
As I see it hunans still need to control the development process and also testing. Maybe not low level, but they still need to have the technical skills to review what's been done and simply reject, correct and limit the code changes that achievement the requirement to the point. Otherwise, sooner or later, things will explode and the vibe coders wouldn't know from where to approach it. And when this happens in production, believe me that it matters.
