Actually I have a good guess at what his answer would be:
A year ago, LLMs could do work that looked superficially good, but if you dig deeper, the work didn’t hold up. So by using them, you’re replacing good work with bad work
Today, LLMs are much better at doing work that holds up to scrutiny
FWIW I think that answer is correct in some domains, but I’d also say there were domains where 2025!LLMs were already doing good work, so people who were heavily using LLMs last year weren’t necessarily “moving backwards”.
And on the flip side, domains where mid-2026!LLMs don’t do good work but it’s easy for people to be fooled by superficial signs of them seeming good, like writing.
Actually I have a good guess at what his answer would be:
A year ago, LLMs could do work that looked superficially good, but if you dig deeper, the work didn’t hold up. So by using them, you’re replacing good work with bad work
Today, LLMs are much better at doing work that holds up to scrutiny
FWIW I think that answer is correct in some domains, but I’d also say there were domains where 2025!LLMs were already doing good work, so people who were heavily using LLMs last year weren’t necessarily “moving backwards”.
And on the flip side, domains where mid-2026!LLMs don’t do good work but it’s easy for people to be fooled by superficial signs of them seeming good, like writing.