It is kind of odd to admit this before the second round of interviews. Perhaps glorification of LLMs is now a positive, but still it is a gamble. It is also od

It is kind of odd to admit this before the second round of interviews. Perhaps glorification of LLMs is now a positive, but still it is a gamble. It is also odd that this article appears here after someone complained about vibe coding killing the interest in algorithms. This game is played often. People have valid complaints, then someone posts a "rebuttal" ("LLMs are not bad for $X---they are good for $X"). Anyway, he uses LLMs more in the search capability, which is less controversial than generative AI and vibe coding.