Code reviewing was never the most interesting thing to do. But it had one important element. That, if done right, it was knowledge exchange between the reviewer and the coder. That can be quite motivating. Helping a fellow coder to become better. Reviewing "AI" written code does NOT come with that potential reward. The machine doesn't learn the way a human does. This turns code review into a menial, fruitless task that leads to frustration instead. That's my observation and opinion.

1/2

The second element I have heard a few times now: "AI" written code is not seen as "my" code by coders. They don't feel attached to it in the way they do with code they have written themselves. Hence they are not really "feeling" for it, so they are also not really interested in making it better or defending it in the review cycle. Just tweak the prompt and move on. This is having a real impact on motivation, discussion and results. It is hard to put in metrics, though.

2/2