Without doxxing myself too much - I resigned from a 15-person startup last month. It operates as described in the article.

The only human review that is happening is on plans before the agent implements, and even then plans are generated from meeting transcripts.

Changes are pushed directly to master. The agent run uses subagent (orchestrator with planner, implementer, reviewer, tester).

The review step is a 3-model (sometimes more) summary to get different “opinions”.

All the context is saved in the repo - plans, chats, docs, references, skills, agent definitions.

People work in parallel via worktrees to do multiple changes at once. Neither the reasoning nor the diffs are paid attention to.

Non engineers are making changes to the product. There are no product or design artefacts in the traditional sense. It’s all markdown with diagrams that are fed as context.

The older stacks are getting fully rewritten (go, protos, microservices, db) to be typescript sql monoliths to move as fast as possible.

Technical discussions aren’t held because rolling back an architectural change is done via unleashing the agents for an hour. To do or not to do something is answered by summaries pasted back and forth in slack.

It hasn’t been very fun to work this way for someone deeply technical. People however who see code as means to an end adore this.

In a sense the craft might be dead. The above is still engineering but in quite a different way. I’m in early stages of founding a company and some investors have expectations about the above. “Building is so fast” is a common phrase I hear.

I’ve never worked in corporate so I don’t know how far behind this wave is, nor have I embraced it but there are more than a few organisations running like this.