Exactly what point is the article trying to make? Just seems to ramble along with no conclusion. For all it talks about paying the price, apparently the only issue is increased bug reports / fixes, which is objectively a good thing, and presumably a temporary state of affairs until the tech debt has been paid.

increased bug reports / fixes, which is objectively a good thing,

It's not a good thing of the AI coding is adding more bugs that need reporting and fixing. That just wastes the time of the actual programmers who have to do the bug fixing.

Every reasonable project that has accepted / embraced AI has made the point that code quality is still the responsibility of the human and PRs will be rejected if quality drops. That's not the issue at hand.

It absolutely is a problem, because now that there's 1000 bug reports where there used to be 10.

Especially in an ecosystem that is paying attention to quality, someone has to review and sort those reports, evaluate them for quality vs close them.