I don't mean to be pedantic here but 6% improvement in productivity is a rounding error. You can achieve a higher level of productivity by just removing the pin

I don't mean to be pedantic here but 6% improvement in productivity is a rounding error. You can achieve a higher level of productivity by just removing the ping pong table from the break room. This would indicate to me there is a non-significant improvement in productivity. That seems consistent with my having talked to several senior+ engineers who tried copilot and found it simply wrong or unnecessary. There might be AI written code in the future and surely the "no code" shills will latch onto it with religious fervor. But, much like "no code will eat the world", this too will fail. Until general intelligence is capable of producing large scale systems that need to be coddled and orchestrated, bespoke perhaps even brand new approaches to business problems, etc, there will always be many highly paid humans there. The conspiracy theorist in me makes me think that all of this push to shill this product constantly is yet another way the FAANGS are attempting to dilute the pool enough to lower wages. Engineering is highly skilled, highly technical work. The actual work of someone higher than junior level typically evolved way beyond simple CRUD coding exercises. When you spend more time making sure copilot meets standards, the code is correct, etc it's simply not that useful. It feels much more like the fancy test case generators for some IDEs. For very trivial, borderline rudimentary cases, it works wonderfully and saves time. Once things become complicated and messy it just gets in the way.