I have difficulty grasping how one would call a software project theirs, without understanding the meat of how it's put together & how it works. Or having done a good chunk of the grunt work.

Without such understanding, how is it 'your' project? Simply because you started it? Your taste / selection of design choices? Your "grand vision"? Your work in setting up some coding agent(s)? The prompt(s) you devised?

Ideas are cheap. But good software comes from good understanding of the problem. Good understanding comes from analyzing the issues in detail. Knowing the trade-offs between different solutions. All of which is not cheap. It is that expertise & experience which earns experts their paycheck.

When you did that, then sure, go ahead & have coding agents implement using a structure you designed, algorithms you picked, reviewing the code and test results. But just vibe-code a whole project & kick it out the door? Result might work but I'd be more impressed by the coding agents' capabilities than your input.

Article does give a nice hint about how the software landscape may change:

"Many of these things were previously off-limits for lots of developers (..) So maybe the world will have more slop, but it might also have more developers in it, that want things to be fast and small."