If it's doesn't work for you, it's because you're a failure!

Still not convinced these LLM bros aren't junior developers (at best) who someone gave a senior title to because everyone else left their shit hole company.

More to the point, that is exactly what the people in this study were doing.

They don't really do into a lot of detail about what they were doing. But they have a table on limitations of the study that would indicate it is not.

We do not provide evidence that: There are not ways of using existing AI systems more effectively to achieve positive speedup in our exact setting. Cursor does not sample many tokens from LLMs, it may not use optimal prompting/scaffolding, and domain/repository-specific training/finetuning/few-shot learning could yield positive speedup.

Back to this:

even if it did it’s not any easier or cheaper than teaching humans to do it.

In my experience, the kinds of information that an AI needs to do its job effectively has a significant overlap with the info humans need when just starting on a project. The biggest problem for onboarding is typically poor or outdated internal documentation. Fix that for your humans and you have it for your LLMs at no extra cost. Use an LLM to convert your docs into rules files and to keep them up to date.