If you don’t read the news you’re uninformed. If you read the news you’re misinformed.

One of the worst cases of misinformation I’ve seen in our space is Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei’s “90%” quote. I’ve seen this ascribed as him claiming 90% of developers would be replaced in 12 months. Yet the actual quote – which you should watch and listen to for yourself – seems quite prescient ~9 months later. If you’ve been upskilling on the tooling and embracing the uncertainty, there’s a very good chance agentic tooling is writing 90%+ of your code right now as he claimed it would back in March 2025.

The quote most people have seen, from a Council on Foreign Relations event in March 2025:

I think we will be there in three to six months, where AI is writing 90% of the code. And then, in 12 months, we may be in a world where AI is writing essentially all of the code.

And the extended quote that follows:

But the programmer still needs to specify what are the conditions of what you’re doing. What is the overall app you’re trying to make. What is the overall design decision. How we collaborate with other code that has been written. How do we have some common sense with whether this is a secure design or an insecure design. So as long as there are these small pieces that a programmer has to do, that AI isn’t good at, I think human productivity will actually be enhanced…

While the menial tasks are easier than ever, AI is not solving the higher-order engineering problems. I wrote about this in the AI architect analogy.

A lot of the misinformation around this quote comes from one shitty Business Insider article with the misleading headline Anthropic’s CEO says that in 3 to 6 months, AI will be writing 90% of the code software developers were in charge of. That “were” does a lot of implication, alongside the lack of including the full quote, alongside the lack of a link to the actual recording of what he said.

What in the actual fuck are we doing here. A professional journalist at a major publication writes a headline designed to generate clicks and fear rather than inform. No link to the source. A selectively edited quote. An implication of mass job loss when the actual message was about human productivity being enhanced.

This isn’t journalism. This is engagement farming with a veneer of credibility.

Go to primary sources. Understand context. Be skeptical of headlines. Call out shitty journalism.

And ban paid digital advertisement to remove the incentive for this garbage.