if their sales and stock depends on saying that new shinny thing is changing the world then they have to say so, and say how it is changing their world . It is

if their sales and stock depends on saying that new shinny thing is changing the world then they have to say so, and say how it is changing their world . It is not Netflix or Airbnb or Stripe etc making this claim, google managers have a vested interest in this. If this metric was meaningful either of two things should have happened - google should have fired 25 % developers or built 25 % more product . Both of this would visible in their financial reporting and has not happened. metrics like this claim depends on how you count, that is easily gamed and can be made to show any % between 0-99 you want. Of the top of head - I could count all AI generated code used for training as new code - consider compiler output to assembly as AI code by adding some meaningless AI step in it - code generated with boilerplate perhaps even generated by llm now - mix autocomplete with llm prompts so on The number only needs to believable , 25 is believable now, it is not true but you would believe it >50 has psychological significance and bad PR on machines replacing humans jobs , less than 10 is bad for AI sales , 25 works all the commenters in this thread is testament to that