My perspective is pretty much opposite yours. A really common trouble is when programmers implement a working solution to a poorly understood problem. Building a good specification is oftentimes much, much harder than implementing that specification.
Maybe what you're referring to is what happens in a lot of software organizations, where the "what" is often just phrased as a poorly-thought-out, loose problem, and it's actually up to the developer to come up with the specification and the implementation at the same time. But that's not what I'm talking about. What I'm saying is that if you're good at specification, your job is about to get a whole lot easier, and therefore more valuable, by using these models.
You're right. I appreciate this comment. This is what people come to HN for. Thanks. Fat chance finding any traction with getting devs at those orgs your just described getting traction even with the LLM backing them. People don't like to be wrong. The status quo will continue, perhaps indefinitely. I also still have my doubts that an LLM can be smarter than a fresh-out-of-college junior dev.
Maybe what you're referring to is what happens in a lot of software organizations, where the "what" is often just phrased as a poorly-thought-out, loose problem, and it's actually up to the developer to come up with the specification and the implementation at the same time. But that's not what I'm talking about. What I'm saying is that if you're good at specification, your job is about to get a whole lot easier, and therefore more valuable, by using these models.