> are there to give you confidence that future changes haven't broken things.

> They're not there to catch bugs

What's the difference between those 2 things? I genuinely can't tell. Are you saying "E2E tests are only useful if they are *always* green"? No - of course they'd ideally be always green - but it they would be guaranteed to be green, only then they would become completely useless.

It's like saying "ideally you shouldn't write code with bugs in the first place". Sure. Ideally we shouldn't. Now back in the real world...