I've never had a colleague make up a method that doesn't exist and then hand it to me saying it was done. That's not tech debt, it's wrong in a way that's disti

I've never had a colleague make up a method that doesn't exist and then hand it to me saying it was done. That's not tech debt, it's wrong in a way that's distinct from humans. The problem with LLMs is they treat all context as significant. Even telling it to ignore previous context is just confusing it more. So Cursor gets hung up on dumb shit like insignificant linter errors or insisting that extracting a block of code to a function will fix a bug (what?). You add more cursor rules to keep it from doing these things, which doesn't focus it, it just pollutes the context more. It doesn't know when to ignore files it's already read. It just gets shittier and shittier. I appreciate that I can tell someone where the problem is and they'll know what is or isn't irrelevant. Edit: Here is something Claude Sonnet 4 told me today. I would expect this if I was talking to it for a while, not the second request. "Used excludeSwitches (plural) instead of excludeSwitches"