Yes, without evidence there's no effect. It's telling that nowhere on cursor.ai's website do they appear to claim using their tool will actually make you, or crucially your team, more efficient.
There is no trustworthy evidence that I'm aware of to support the claim that "using an LLM IDE makes developers 5x more effective". Do you disagree? Testimonials don't cut it, because individuals are prone to hysteria, delusions, and just making stuff up.
All I'm asking for is a few trustworthy case studies showing unambiguously that it's worth my time and money to pay attention to this genai stuff. That shouldn't be hard for a trillion dollar industry, right? Like show me this isn't just hysterical hype. Don't tell me, show me.
What does it even mean to be 5x more effective? Because that's the thing. Testimonials is where we're at because how do you measure "more effective"? I'm not making any claim on a number, 5x 10x? .2x because you have to go back and fix the shitty code it wrote? We don't have a good way to measure programmer productivity. We all know lines of code is ridiculous. And how do you account for how much brain space it takes up. If the LLM lets someone bang out useful code in between meetings all day, vs needing some truly quiet time for some deep deep work to properly get into the right zone... how do you metricize that and show, what, lines of code and interruptions per hour on a graph to have a line that goes up and to the right?
It turns out that it's actually a really hard problem to measure, so, even for a trillion dollar industry, it is hard.