Code quality does matter it’s just marketing people being shortsighted because their job is to react to the market. LLM gives a sense of « it’s kind of easy to build stuff, why bother loosing time with quality when I’m there at 80% in 20% of the time ? ».

There is compounding effects where given any big enough system this won’t scale, even Google did talks this week on this topic. So I guess you’re right, time will prove who’s right or wrong and what bet was the best with which consequence

I am genuinely sad and feel I’m losing something and if I do everything like I used to do, I am pressured that I waste time.

Now if it’s my job then I can’t have a knowledge debt and if Claude is down I’ll continue working manually because I know and understand and can continue without having to understand a lot of logic before continuing

In my workflows Claude does pushbacks all the time and justifies why. There is back and forth just like a colleague. It’s not perfect but the results are usually good

He answered:

> Well, yeah, who cares?

> This is where we need to differentiate between what truly needs to be clean (critical APIs) and where some random guy coding a product in a week will wipe the floor with a team of engineers with a clean architecture and no product after three months.

> What's more, this "vibe coder" is on the right side of history… Who's to say AI won't be able to just rewrite the code cleanly while keeping the core idea within 6, 12, or 18 months?

> This is also the question that drives business... and in business, "good enough" has almost always trumped "perfect." Except when you're making an ultra-luxury product like a Ferrari or something. Which software almost never is (if ever).

So when head of companies don’t care about quality, they’ll push hard no matter what to have speed.