I think a lot of teams will wrestle with the existing code review process being abused for quite a while. A lot of people are lazy or get into tech because it’s easy money. The combination of LLMs and a solid code review process means you can submit slop and not even be blamed for the results easier than ever.

This is a strawman isn't it? I haven't read one post or comment saying that writing code is "the bottleneck".

It's something that takes time. That time is now greatly reduced. So you can try more ideas and explore problems by trying solutions quickly instead of just talking about them.

Let's also not ignore the other side of this. The need for shared understanding, knowledge transfer etc is close to zero if your team is agents and your code is the input context (where the actual code is now at the level that machine code is now: very rarely if ever looked at). That's kinda where we're heading. Software is about to get much grander, and your team is individuals working on loosely connected parts of the product. Potentially hundreds of them.

My philosophy is dirt simple:

I am the pointy end of the spear.

I'm less concerned with professionals using LLMs to code and more excited by the idea of regular people using LLMs to create programs that solve their problems.

Maybe true, but not true enough.

Wish the blog had an RSS feed

The title says it all

bottom line is only thing that matters in the end

The author doesn't give any arguments to support his claim.

Nan, it depends on quality of data you trained the bot.