> it doesn’t really matter if code was written by human or llm

In theory no, but for a successful execution you must have people that understand what's going on, otherwise the competitor that understands will eat you.

> who cares how was it written.

In the pre AI era a lot of sw was written by interns, juniors, some bigcon consultants, some offshore indian or east-european dudes, it didn't even matter before.

One thing I keep discovering about the agentic era of programming is that all of the old lessons and bits of wisdom about programming are still valid. They're just 10 to 100x more important now that you can generate 10,000 lines in an hour.

e.g. Break your code up into loosely coupled modules, don't have leaky abstractions, don't have huge God files, have good black box end-to-end testing, do the design work before the implementation, do lots of automated testing, have good documentation, etc.

Here is another one that was always true, end users only care about the observable behavior of your program. Does it solve the problem in a performant way? Is it reliable?

And another one, it was common when you inherited a large code base that was mature and written before you to not have any clue how most of it worked.

We have to accept that the art of nudging the text around is just not part of producing code for money anymore.

> Like if the next torvalds ships something great in the open, who cares how was it written.

I was reading a biography of Tovalds and one of the core things that mark the birth of Linux was the drive to learn. Same when reading “Coders at Work”, the will to learn and make things happen is a common recurrence.

I’ve never seen LLM coding that is not “I can’t bother to learn about this”. It’s always about magicking answers out of thin air, not about motivation to explore some fields.

>Like if the next torvalds ships something great in the open, who cares how was it written.

nope. but, vibe coded slop is all we're actually seeing.