>Instead it will mean that bosses can fire 75-90% of the (very expensive) engineers, with the ones who remain left to prompt the AI and clean up any mistakes/misunderstandings.

This is the same logic that has driven cheap off-shoring in non-technical companies.

For decades orgs have been able to buy "human-level" (i.e. humans) engineering for a tiny fraction of an engineer's salary, and there have been millions of eager salesmen for off-shore dev shops pushing them to do it too. After seeing the outcomes of this approach, I understand why well-paid engineers remain well paid. And why they'll remain well-paid after the LLM non-pocalypse.

If you think LLMs are so amazing, I would encourage you to see how much you can rely on them to replace human beings in real world scenarios. Not in contrived PR pieces and cherry picked examples but in situations where actual real people would otherwise be working together to deliver commercially valuable outcomes.

You believe you have domain specific insights that allow you to state, with confidence, that LLMs are able to replace a highly technical and well-compensated role at virtually no cost. If that's the case, you're sitting on a gold mine. If I believed that, I'd be starting a development agency tomorrow.