Connect with us

Tech

Coders are refusing to work without AI — and that could come back to bite them 

Published

on

In 2026, you cannot snatch AI coding tools out of developers’ vice-grip hands, researchers have discovered.  

But while AI is undoubtedly helping coders produce code faster, it may not be producing better code, other researchers warn. And that could cause problems down the road for them. 

Specifically, in February 2026, respected AI research lab METR published a surprising revelation: most developers won’t work, even on a limited number of tasks, without AI anymore. 

METR had hoped to provide an update to some groundbreaking research published a few months earlier, in 2025, on AI coding productivity. In it, researchers measured how much time open source developers took to do tasks by hand versus with AI. 

While developers in that study reported that AI was making them more productive, they were shocked to learn it actually slowed them down. Sure, it generated code faster, but then they spent extra time finding and fixing errors, steering the AI and waiting on it to complete tasks. 

When METR set out to repeat the experiment to measure advances in AI and coder proficiency, they couldn’t.

Devs weren’t willing to participate “because they do not wish to work without AI” even just for the study, the researchers confessed. 

Instead, METR published a survey in May that allowed technical employees to self-report their AI productivity gains. Not surprisingly, they perceived that AI made them twice as valuable to their organizations.  

But recent headlines about the wild expense of so-called tokenmaxxing, coupled with a smattering of recent research, make such self-perceptions dubious.  

Tokenmaxxing, or using the number of tokens a person uses as a proxy for productivity with AI, has been the trend of 2026 so far. And it may already be over. 

Amazon shut down its internal token-tracking leaderboard called Kirorank after employees were gaming it by using AI agents excessively, and running up costs, the Financial Times reported this week. The employees proved that AI use does not automatically translate to increased productivity.

Uber blew through its 2026 AI budget within the first four months of the year, The Information reported. COO Andrew Macdonald recently said on a podcast that such spending hadn’t led to a measurable increase in projects or productivity. 

AI-generated code also doesn’t necessarily reduce ongoing code maintenance needs, and may even increase it, programmer and author James Shore elegantly argued in a blog post that went viral on Hacker News. 

“You write code twice as quick now? Better hope you’ve halved your maintenance costs,” he wrote. “Otherwise, you’re screwed. You’re trading a temporary speed boost for permanent indenture.” 

There’s other evidence that AI can increases code maintenance woes. 

A viral tweet from Aiswarya Sankar, founder and CEO of reliability engineering agent startup Entelligence AI, proclaims that companies are spending 44% of their tokens on bug fixes that their AI generated. Code reviewing tool company Code Rabbit says it analyzed open source pull requests and found that AI produced 1.7x more problems than human code.

Those are, admittedly, self-serving stats from those trying to sell AI code reviewing tools. 

Yet independent researchers have also found such issues. Researchers from the respected Singapore Management University published a report in April warning that “AI-generated code can introduce long-term maintenance costs into real software projects.” 

Given that programmers love their AI assistants, what’s the solution?  

Well, those who want to sell you AI coding agents say devs can just use AI coding agents to do the bone wearing tasks of fixing code as fast as AI spits it out. That’s what Cognition founder CEO Scott Wu suggests, maker of AI coding agent Devin.  

But even he admits that, while Devin can work independently, he’d currently rate its skill between a junior and mid-level programmer, depending on the task. This is not a hand-it-off and forget it solution.

The SMU researchers suggest a more human approach. Programmers should know what tasks AI does and doesn’t do well as deeply as they know their favorite coding languages. They need strong quality assurance systems designed for AI and they are stuck with carefully reviewing the AI’s work as if it was a junior dev.

Meanwhile, the researchers say (and Wu agrees), humans should still be doing the big-picture work like software architecture and security design.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

>

Continue Reading

Tech

Planned Amazon data center could become the biggest climate polluter in the U.S.

Published

on

As part of a planned data center in Pecos County, Texas, Amazon is investing in an on-site power plant that could become the largest source of climate pollution in the United States, according to The New York Times.

The NYT says the plant would burn natural gas and is permitted to release 33 million tons of carbon dioxide per year — more than any other power plant in the U.S.

In a statement, an Amazon spokesperson confirmed that the data center will “be powered by new on-site generation that won’t raise electricity costs for Texas families.” (Data centers face growing political opposition for a number of reasons, including their effect on electricity costs.)

AI has already had a significant impact on Amazon’s carbon emissions, which it reported were up 16% last year — the wrong direction for a company that pledged to eliminate its carbon emissions by 2040. And that could get worse as Amazon and tech companies back the development of huge natural gas plants to support their power-hungry data centers.

The Amazon spokesperson said, “The world looks different now than when we co-founded the climate pledge,” while also claiming, “Our commitment hasn’t changed.”

>

Continue Reading

Tech

OpenAI acquires presentation startup NextSlide

Published

on

NextSlide recently announced that it’s joining OpenAI, with the presentation startup’s team members now working on ChatGPT.

The NextSlide website currently displays a note from founder Ahmed Beshry describing the startup’s product as one “that could turn prompts, notes, documents, or research into a polished, editable presentation.”

The ultimate goal, Beshry said, was “to make visual communication more accessible and help more people express their ideas clearly.” So by joining OpenAI, the team will “continue pursuing that same mission: building AI products that help people create, communicate, and turn their ideas into meaningful work.”

The financial terms of the deal were not disclosed. In a note on LinkedIn, Beshry said the announcement is coming “a few months late,” as the acquisition took place “earlier this year.”

Beshry was previously a co-founder at Caper AI, a smart cart/cashier-less checkout startup acquired by Instacart in 2021.

>

Continue Reading

Tech

X replaces ‘misaligned’ revenue sharing program with Original Content Rewards

Published

on

X, the social media platform now owned by Elon Musk’s SpaceX, is shaking up how it pays influencers and creators.

In announcing the change, the company said it will be winding down its existing Revenue Sharing program and replacing it with something called Original Content Rewards. X will stop accepting new Revenue Sharing participants, while existing participants will continue earning money through September 7.

Then, starting on September 8, they’ll be able to apply for the new program. Participants will still need to subscribe to one of X’s Premium tiers, and there will be qualifying thresholds for follower count (500 verified followers) and impressions (500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users in 90 days), but it sounds like the big change is the emphasis on originality. 

What counts as original content? X said it can include original reporting and analysis, photos and videos created by the poster, or memes and graphics they’ve designed themselves. Commentary also counts, but “if your content regularly incorporates material created by others, you’ll need to contribute meaningful original value for it to qualify under our original content guidelines.”

The company also included examples of posts that won’t count as original, such as those just copied over from another account, downloaded from one account and re-uploaded to your own, or reposting content “without meaningful transformation.”

This announcement follows repeated attempts by X to reform the Revenue Sharing program, for example reducing payments to aggregators and “clickbait” accounts in April. But these efforts have also prompted complaints from popular accounts profiting from the current system; Musk even reversed some of those changes (giving a creator’s local audience more weight when calculating payouts) after a backlash.

In a post about the new changes, X’s Allegra Jacchia wrote that the existing program “had reached a point where its incentives were misaligned.”

“Creators should be focused on bringing net new content to the platform instead of maximizing payouts,” she said. “We could have kept adding more rules and exceptions, but ultimately the better decision was to start fresh and build a program designed from day one to reward originality.”

Jacchia added that X be “continue refining the program, improving our models, and raising the bar over time.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

>

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.