I'd say certianly yes. At my company we've set up an experiment: we've forked our monorepo and gave several agents (OpenClaw, Claude code, GH Copilot reviewer, Codex) full R/W access and a Slack channel where we give them tasks and they carry them out. The fork shows 490 commits ahead, 10 commits behind our real repo (we're only a couple people, and use "Squash and merge" on PRs).
They naturally produce bugs at an astonishing rate, and we don't review the code ourselves, but the project is growing faster than their context windows, and I believe we'll drop it soon.
14x is insane, especially since the quality and quantity of IRL software has barely budged.
One could hope that we'd use these newfound agentic coding powers to actually realize value, improve quality, etc. Instead I see enshittification and stagnation. What are we even doing with all these tokens?
If it can't provide the service, it should stop selling until it can.
This is like the AOL dialup busy signal fiasco of the mid-90's all over again. Except this time, instead of getting mad, people are making excuses for the poor, beleaguered trillion-dollar company.
I really don't understand people saying that this is due to AI commits and it is all the volume's fault.
A volume increase that is a single order of magnitude (which 14x is) should not result in this level of failures.
When I compare what Github does and the volumes vs social media companies, payment companies, video platforms, etc, it just doesn't make sense that it is just a volume problem.
It looks a lot more like a platform that already has baseline issues that are compounded by increased volume.