I agree with your main point, and almost as if to nitpick: more and more output (specifically in the context of LLM-produced code) is paradoxical to economies o

I agree with your main point, and almost as if to nitpick: more and more output (specifically in the context of LLM-produced code) is paradoxical to economies of scale, precisely because LLMs make too many mistakes at scale. So then we necessarily have to limit their use to relatively simple and mundane tasks. That is, of course, still valuable in itself, but history teaches us that there _will_ be a mass movement to building large, complex, risky products using LLMs. I don't believe that that's something that we can stop. Somehow, I feel like the popularization of LLMs is a force of natural selection where those who are smart enough to keep training their minds will find themselves more financially secure than those who don't, and therefore more likely to survive.