I wonder what's going to happen after applying no-review practice, when nobody knows what code-base actually does, in enough details to provide technical guidance?

> If I were looking for work as an IC, I would avoid orgs that still practice this as a kind of make-work nearly as offensive as gratuitous meetings.

Would you get on a plane knowing its systems weren't code reviewed by humans?

Because there are better ways now to solve the problems that code review exists to solve.

> Technical debt is nearly a nothingburger now. If you went in the wrong direction, just... change the code to go in the right direction.

Uncharitable though it may sound, what I hear reading this is "Tell me you've never worked on a large system without telling me you've never worked on a large system."

How are you going to know the AI did not build the wrong thing? Not entirely wrong, but they will make some bad decision without consulting you. Even with a spec, AIs find a way to do it. (Humans can do this too.)