[notTooFarGone]

It boils down to responsibility.

We need to trust machines more than humans because machines can't get responsibility. That code that you pushed and broke prd - you can't point at the machine.

It is also predictability/growth in a sense. I can assess certain people and know what they will probably get wrong and develop the person and adjust it. If that person uses LLMs it disguises that exposure of skill and leads to a very hard signal to read as a senior dev, hampering their growth.

[VenturingVole]

I absolutely agree with your points - assuming that "machines" to mean the code as opposed to the LLMs: As a "Staff+" IC type and mentoring and training a couple of apprentice-level developers I've already asked on several occasions "why did you do this?" and had a response of "oh, that's what the AI did." I'm very patient, but have made clear that's something to never utter - at least not until one has the experience to deeply understand boundaries/constraints effectively.

I did see a paper recently on the impact of AI/LLMs and danger to critical thinking skills - it's a very real issue and I'm having to actively counter this seemingly natural tendency many have.

With respect to signals, mine was around the attitude in general. I'd much rather work with someone who goes "Yes, but.." than one who is outright dismissive.

Increasing awareness of the importance of context will be a topic for a long time to come!