Incredibuild Team
reading time:
AI for software development is one of the hottest trends in tech. From GitHub Copilot to AI-driven IDEs, more developers are leaning on AI, and even more are giving it way too much room for maneuver.
Microsoft reports that 80% of developers would be sad if they lost AI assistants, with many citing faster task completion and higher satisfaction.*
But new research also shows the story isn’t all sunshine. Other studies highlight real challenges (from slower deliveries to security flaws) that teams must face head-on.
Let’s dive deeper into what developers are struggling with as the reliance on AI tools has increased dramatically.
Microsoft’s study we discussed at the beginning, found that AI coding assistants boosted productivity and developer happiness. However, a controlled study in 2025** revealed something surprising: developers using AI tools actually took 19% longer to complete certain open-source tasks compared to non-AI users. Meanwhile, in the process, AI users truly believed that they were faster.
Takeaway: AI may feel like a productivity booster, but actual results can vary depending on the task and the workflow.
When teams push AI-generated code into production too quickly, software quality can take a backseat. TechRadar called this the “AI speed trap.”*** Essentially, it’s a rush to release that often sacrifices stability, testing, and long-term maintainability.
AI assistants don’t always produce clean, secure code. The concept of “vibe coding” (accepting AI code without full understanding) is becoming way too well-known. It introduces a risk of new bugs and vulnerabilities that slow down the development process.
Real-world incidents back this up:
The danger of these mistakes is their invisibility. Catching them may be harder than preventing them.
Traditional vulnerability detection methods aren’t always prepared for AI-generated code. Today, AI code requires new approaches to vulnerability handling, since hallucinations can create entirely new security risks.
One study showed that developers often treat AI code like human-written code, skipping extra checks. Meanwhile, AI outputs often need closer review than human code does.
Who owns AI-generated code? What if it introduces bias? The field of AI-assisted software development is still grappling with unresolved legal and ethical issues. The key fields to explore are ownership, accountability, and fairness
Until regulations catch up, companies will need internal policies for reviewing and attributing AI code.
While issues with code are ongoing, teams also face practical hurdles with AI:
Of course, everyone knows how to use AI tools to generate simple code, and AI is actually doing a good job. However, when it comes to something more challenging, mistakes begin to snowball.
AI tools are changing the shape of developer roles. One growing concern is how junior developers will build experience if entry-level coding tasks are increasingly handled by AI.
Without those early opportunities, gaining the practical knowledge needed to grow into senior roles becomes harder.
At the same time, even experienced developers can fall into the trap of relying on AI suggestions without fully understanding them. This can speed things up in the short term but leaves teams more vulnerable to mistakes down the line.
AI isn’t free. Far from it. While the price of basic usage is coming down, running complex workflows can still add up quickly, especially at scale.
AI also carries an environmental footprint. Large models consume a huge amount of energy, both when they’re trained and when they’re running. This has already started raising questions about sustainability.
While AI use safety deserves another article or even an e-book, some of the easiest steps to implement into the workflow are:
Development teams need better and more sophisticated tools to check their work before completing complex projects. Without an adjusted work algorithm, it’s easy to become an unsuspecting victim of AI mistakes.
AI for software development is here to stay. It can boost productivity and developer happiness, but also introduce new risks for quality and security.
At Incredibuild, we believe in accelerating builds responsibly. Just like distributed build acceleration helps you move faster without cutting corners, AI can be a game-changer. We are staying on top of these developments to bring you higher-quality solutions.
Stay tuned.
Not likely. AI is a strong assistant but not a replacement. It can generate snippets, automate repetitive work, and suggest fixes. However, it lacks context, creativity, and accountability. Developers still need to review the code and make architectural decisions that AI can’t handle on its own.
There isn’t a single “best” AI tool. The choice depends on the use case. Some developers prefer GitHub Copilot for IDE integration, while others turn to ChatGPT or specialized models for problem-solving and code review. The right choice comes down to workflow fit.
Yes, ChatGPT can be very helpful for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, or explaining tricky concepts. However, just like with any AI, its output should be reviewed. It’s a useful partner, not an all-knowing expert.
**https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-os-dev-study/
Table of Contents
Shorten your builds
Incredibuild empowers your teams to be productive and focus on innovating.
Incredibuild empowers your teams to be productive and focus on innovating.
