I was waiting for the "so I tried coding something with an LLM myself, and I found..." paragraph. But apparently the author never did try it, or at least if they did, they didn't write about it.

This is a very academic approach to the subject - read what other people have written about it without ever doing it yourself. Study what someone said about LLM coding 50 years ago, before they were even invented, to see what you think about it.

I would strongly suggest to the author that you just give it a go, and see what you think, without the preconception of other people's opinions.

My experience has been remarkable, and, like others, I'm finding real joy in being able to move past the code to actually design and play with whole systems and architectures.

It gets to the essence of code; which is not about the code, but about the system that code implements. Being able to write code in 3 minutes not 30 minutes does not bog us down in review (the LLM is perfectly capable of reviewing code too). It frees us to explore systems and architectures without worrying about the sunk cost of the existing code, or the effort of changing it.