Your anecdote is not helpful without seeing the inputs, prompts and outputs. What you're describing sounds like not using the correct model, providing good context or tools with a reasoning model that can intelligently populate context for you.

My own anecdotes:

In two years we have gone from copy/pasting 50-100 line patches out of ChatGPT, to having agent enabled IDEs help me greenfield full stack projects, or maintain existing ones.

Our product delivery has been accelerated while delivering the same quality standards verified by our internal best practices we've our codified with determistic checks in CI pipelines.

The power come from planning correctly. We're in the realm of context engineering now, and learning to leverage the right models with the right tools in the right workflow.

Most novice users have the misconception that you can tell it to "bake a cake" and get the cake ypu had in your mind. The reality is that baking a cake can be broken down into a recipe with steps that can be validated. You as the human-in-the-loop can guide it to bake your vision, or design your agent in such a way that it can infer more information about the cake you desire.

I don't place a power drill on the table and say "build a shelf," expecting it to happen, but marketing of AI has people believing they can.

Instead, you give an intern a power drill with a step-by-step plan with all the components and on-the-job training available on demand.

If you're already good at the SDLC, you are rewarded. Some programmers aren't good a project management, and will find this transition difficult.

You won't lose your job to AI, but you will lose your job to the human using AI correctly. This isn't speculation either, we're also seeing workforce reduction supplemented by Senior Developers leveraging AI.