[senko]

Even if that were true (and I'd challenge that assumption[0]), there's no dichotomy here.

Software quality, for the most part, is a cost center, and as such will always be minimal bearable.

As the civil engineering saying goes, any fool can make a bridge that stands, it takes an engineer to build a bridge that barely stands.

And anyway, all of those concerns are orthogonal to the tooling used, in this case LLMs.

[0] things we now take for granted, such as automated testing, safer languages, ci/cd, etc; makes for far better software than when we used to roll our own crypto in C.