I read the other piece and now this piece and it still reads like scaremongering to me. Sure there is hype and a lot of stuff will turn out to be bad. A lot of

I read the other piece and now this piece and it still reads like scaremongering to me. Sure there is hype and a lot of stuff will turn out to be bad. A lot of people (me included) will say "told you so". On the flip side, I do use code generation and we review that code like we review all code. The formal scientific approach demanded in the article runs against my option of just trying it out. So the question becomes whether my colleagues will change their review practices to humor me and my dumb bot. If they do, yes we've become hype-infected and will earn us some failures down the line. But I don't see why we should be helpless here and why we should defer to whatever scientists for their judgement.