This work surveyed 331 software developers at Microsoft about what AI lets them do that they could not do before and analyzed their answers using reflexive thematic analysis with a human-in-the-loop, multi-model AI council.
Abstract
Measuring AI by how much faster developers work is like judging electricity by how much faster it spun a steam-era factory. A fuller measure asks what new work becomes possible. We surveyed 331 software developers at Microsoft about what AI lets them do that they could not do before and analyzed their answers using reflexive thematic analysis with a human-in-the-loop, multi-model AI council. Developers described doing familiar work faster (Faster, 45%), undertaking work previously beyond their reach (Further, 36.9%), and taking on new kinds of work centered on building for and directing AI agents (Afresh, 12.4%). Across these accounts, learning and scaffolding ran in both directions: developers learned new skills with AI while externalizing their tacit knowledge as the context and standards that guide AI's work. Drawing on Vygotsky's zone of proximal development, we frame developers and AI as joint learners whose zones meet at the skill-judgment nexus: AI can supply skill faster than it can reliably judge its own work, and developers must continuously bridge that gap. Whether they do sets them on one of two paths. On one, developers'judgment grows alongside AI's skill, and they codify what they learn so the loop keeps turning. On the other, they become hollow orchestrators, approving work they can no longer judge and losing the identity and meaning they once drew from it. Based on our findings, we offer a two-way scaffolding playbook to help developers, teams, and tool builders take the first path.
Artificial intelligence is likely the largest disruptor to the discipline of software engineering since third and fourth generation languages arrived and we have all heard the stories of its impact. Productivity increases of more than 100x, faster delivery and reduced workforces, but also drops in quality, shifts in co...
J. Noppen· Proceedings of the 41st IEEE...· 0 citations
It is argued that generative AI can degrade research by eroding the very practices through which scholarly judgement is formed, and defended because it rests on four sources and warrants of research that cannot be automated: tacit knowledge, personal commitment, socialisation and deep reading.
Claudio Novelli, Luciano Floridi· European Law Journal· 0 citations
A real-world AI evaluation framework focused on AI-in-use: how people actually appropriate, adapt, and work around AI systems in context, and what consequences follow over time is proposed.
Reva Schwartz, Gabriella Waters· Social science computer revi...· 0 citations
AI alignment is standardly framed as making AI systems track what humans want. But what users want, under everyday conditions, is frequently at odds with what users themselves would reflectively endorse. Across AI and the broader attention economy, the former is systematically elicited and optimized for while the latte...
Jakob Stenseke, Jocelyn Zhu, Dylan Hadfield-Menell· Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM...· 0 citations
AI is no longer just a tool for learning; it is becoming an active participant. This shift brings clear benefits in speed and personalization, but it also stirs up some deep-rooted problems. This paper looks at these problems as a three-sided puzzle. The first side concerns the learner's own sense of self. When AI step...
Xin-Xin Kang, Qian Zhang, Lei Liu et al.· World Journal of Educational...· 0 citations
A small core retains implementation authority while a broader community continues to shape the software without writing code, and access to coding increasingly depends on approval rather than self-initiated contribution, forming a stewardship community.
AI agents can generate code at a scale that’s hard for humans to review line-by-line. PDD Kit helps ensure the code is doing what the developer intended by creating formal specifications and testing against them. It converts developer intent into a Verus specification, proves AI-generated code meets it for every input, and uses tests where proofs aren't practical. Developers review intent, not every line. The post Formally verifying agent-written full-stack web apps with PDD Kit appeared first o…
Professor Paris Smaragdis develops computers with superhuman hearing for applications like speech recognition, music understanding, and environmental monitoring.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 23, 2026
During the School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences’ 75th Anniversary Symposium, President Sally Kornbluth said “MIT has never needed your particular insight and guidance more than we do now.”
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.