> Given the way LLMs are marketed, we should expect a vastly more favorable project success rate, not simply a close parity, and definitely not a decreased rate. > Even if we consider that the number of attempts will rise if development becomes faster, we're told to expect a greater number of projects should also succeed because they're easier.

I'm not sure I follow why you would think this. Prior to AI was the reason most projects failed because generating the code was too slow or too labor intensive? That would be surprising to me if it was true.