For security or applying business logic (and how it interfaces with programming or database logic), you get less and less assurance by just looking at it.
> On the other hand nobody is going to try building a building only to check if it's structurally sound because that would be absurd.
Structural engineering isn't some mystical science. It's a set of mathematical truths, calculations, SOPs, and so on. If a human can do it, of course a machine can do it, and I'm obviously not saying "run it through the stochastic parrot and out comes a corporate headquarter building", but it's a part of the process where we're rapidly going to get there. And of course, the disruption in that field is already underway. For instance Stru AI. Yes, an engineer is still involved, but the premise is that your single engineer now replaces 10 engineers, and so on.
Gen AI isn't going to be plunging toilets or changing bedpans...yet...but it disrupts almost every role in the "white collar" world. That doesn't mean it eliminates every job, but it completely upends the norms.
Neither of these statements are true if your team is building anything remotely complex with real customers. You can’t quickly verify if your decisions will survive the test of time and past mistakes can’t always be easily fixed. LLMs trivialize the easy parts of software development and enable faster enshittification of the projects they’re used on, but that’s about it.
Citation needed. Many of my users don't even know what correct would be.
> nobody is going to try building a building only to check if it's structurally sound because that would be absurd.
Well, that otoh can be simulated quite easily.