> We find that the adoption of Cursor leads to a statistically significant, large, but transient increase in project-level development velocity, along with a substantial and persistent increase in static analysis warnings and code complexity. Further panel generalized-method-of-moments estimation reveals that increases in static analysis warnings and code complexity are major factors driving long-term velocity slowdown. Our study identifies quality assurance as a major bottleneck for early Cursor adopters and calls for it to be a first-class citizen in the design of agentic AI coding tools and AI-driven workflows.
So overall seems like the pros and cons of "AI vibe coding" just cancel themselves out.
The part you quoted doesn't support your conclusion. Per your quoted paragraph, the benefit of "AI vibe coding" is a large, but transient (i.e temporary) increase in development velocity; while the drawback is a persistent increase in static analysis warnings and code complexity.
To me, this sounds like after the transient increase of velocity has died down, you're left with the same development velocity as you had when you started, but a significantly worse code base.