What's this about?
A Chinese founder reports a client's restructuring after one month of Claude Code and Codex: fired the tech lead who couldn't adopt AI, halved the engineering team, doubled the product managers.
What exactly is the logic?
If AI compresses implementation, the binding constraint becomes deciding *what* to build — so trade builders for specifiers. The fired tech lead marks adoption itself becoming a performance criterion for senior engineers.
Why is this worth noting?
One anecdote, secondhand, from one company — but it's the concrete version of the labor question threaded through today's news (the HN "what becomes of us" thread, Mollick's delegation frame). Whether PM-heavy org charts survive contact with reality is the experiment to watch.