> LLM use in litigation drafting is thus akin to insurgent/guerilla warfare: it take little time, energy, or thinking to create, yet orders of magnitude more to analyze and refute.

The same goes for coding. I have coworkers who use it to generate entire PRs. They can crank out two thousand lines of code that includes tests "proving" that it works, but may or may not actually be nonsense, in minutes. And then some poor bastard like me has to spend half a day reviewing it.

When code is written by a human that I know and trust, I can assume that they at least made reasonable, if not always correct, decisions. I can't assume that with AI, so I have to scrutinize every single line. And when it inevitably turns out that the AI has come up with some ass-backwards architecture, the burden is on me to understand it and explain why it's wrong and how to fix it to the "developer" who hasn't bothered to even read his own PR.

I'm seriously considering proposing that if you use AI to generate a PR at my company, the story points get credited to the reviewer.