AI addiction is not an intelligent decision. But changing this addiction for another one could be worst, so the solution seems to be finding why you are prone to addictions and then solving the core problem.
It seems you expressed the problem very accurately, your insecurities could be very generalized in the population near you. You just need someone to hear you, the therapist don't have to do much. I think you should not invent new problems. Discovering that your problems are common can give you a hint that it is not you but the world that needs to be repaired, meanwhile I simply suggest you to do what is best in any circumstance. This is an expensive advice with no price.
Perhaps is difficult to measure personal productivity in programming, but we can measure that we will run more slowly with 10 kg. in our backpack. I propose this procedure: The SWE selects 10 tasks and guesses some measure of their complexity (time to finish them) and then he randomly select 5 to be done with AI and the rest without. He performs them and finally calculates a deviation D. The deviation D = D_0 - D_1 where D_i = sum (real_time/guessed_time - 1), where D_0 is using AI and D_1 is without AI, the sign and magnitude of D measure respectively if the use of AI is beneficial or detrimental and the impact of using AI. Also, clipping individuals addends to be in the interval [-0.5,0.5] should avoid one bad guess dominating the estimation. Sorry if this is a trivial ideal but it is feasible and intuitively should provide useful information if the tasks are taken among the ones in which each initial guessing has small deviation. A filter should be applied to tasks in which scaffolding by AI surpass a certain relative threshold in case we are interested in generalizing our results to tasks in which scaffolding is not dominating time.
It could happen that the impact of using AI depends of the task at hand, the capability of the SWE to pair programming with it, and of the LLM used, to such an extend that those factors were bigger that the average effect on a bag of tasks, in this case the large deviation from the mean makes any one parameter estimation void of useful information.
Read my other response, my intention was about whoever downvote a comment not a submission. So you would be able to see the rest of the discussion about any submission, I made a mistake omitting the comment restriction.
I was thinking about comments, that is someone that downvote one of your comments should, from that moment on, not be able to see any of your other comments. But the title of the post doesn't reflect my intention. I agree with you that those cancelling karma should no be able to expand here.
