The requests to my team are:

build what product says

close out 90% of the defects you find by priority order

deliver in the priority of feature > security > accessibility

once delivered move on to something else we only have time to work for 3 months on an initiative before we move on

These requirements don't end up with a well working product. They end up with gaps in product, defects that are obvious, non-accessible site. Things take time to polish and be made right, but that's not what is requested. Wanting to iterate and measure isn't important because its not more features.

We already do that on many levels -- compilers, linters, pre-commit hooks etc. Well, AI can just red-team and create new tests. The great thing about red-teaming vs blue teaming is that false positive and hallucinations don't hurt the final product. So you can let it go wild.

Everyone is used to terribly software with awful security holes and performance so why rock the boat?

It's not like average normies will complain.. after all, they are probably used to swimming in an ocean of ads, telemetry and junk. Investors will cut the execs a check regardless, the only thing that matters is piling on more features and growing.

There are _zero_ consequences for writing bad software.