This adds a tiny amount of value, sure, but enough to gamble millions on? Obviously not.
No wonder they failed
TBH I'm so arrogant, I always suspect there's redundant nonsense in any code module I haven't myself inspected. LLM code is no different.
But, for some projects, yes—I still do line-by-line code review with a colleague.
Then again, a lot of my efforts are explicit refactor aimed at reducing LOC and tidying the codebase with, eg DRY.
> The few times I felt lazy and let an AI do a simple function for me, all hell broke loose.
This is confusing, because LLMs are more than capable of implementing "a simple function." How did you spec it out?
I don't think this is arrogance in the sense that it's probably correct. It is however pretty easy to take that line of thinking into an arrogant attitude though, which is the real issue.
When the brain is off for one thing, it's off for the rest as well. There is a lot of talk about "we don't have to think about code so we can think of ideas", but that's not how it works. We just don't think.