> but a human still has to read that code and make sure that it does what you think it does But an AI proficient at programming wouldn't need to spit code back

> but a human still has to read that code and make sure that it does what you think it does But an AI proficient at programming wouldn't need to spit code back to the human. It would produce binaries or usable services, and the human would refine the product also via natural language. The human would act more like a manager than a programmer, and would direct the AI towards the desired goal. The code is just the means to an end, and internally the AI would be free to use whatever machine-optimized language it wants to. Hell, it can write directly in machine code for all I care. That would be more optimal than having to produce human-readable code, and have a fallible human in the process.