> No one is formally verifying the result This might be the case for a hobby project or a start-up MVP being created in a rush, but in reality, there are a few

> No one is formally verifying the result This might be the case for a hobby project or a start-up MVP being created in a rush, but in reality, there are a few points we may want to take into account: 1. Software teams I work with are maintaining the usual review practices. Even if a feature is completely created by AI. It goes through the usual PR review process. The dev may choose "Accept All", although I am not saying this is a good practice, the change still gets reviewed by a human. 2. From my experience, sub-agents intended for code and security review do a good job. It is even possible to use another model to review the code, which can provide a different perspective. 3. A year ago, code written by AI was failing to run the first time, requiring a painful joint troubleshooting effort. Now it works 95% of the time, but perhaps it is not optimal. Given the speed at which it is improving, it is safe to expect that in 6-9 months' time, it will not only work but will also be written to a good quality.