There are paradoxes here that the proponents of coding agents rarely address. Lawson, for example, suggests that junior developers will "code circles" around their seniors, if the latter don't adopt and adapt to the LLM craze. That may well be true, at least in some cases, but it leaves out the crucial detail of how juniors eventually become seniors.
Circumstance has a lot to do with it. We learn by making our own mistakes, not by letting someone else do them for us. We understand how systems work by examining them in great detail for extended amounts of time, not by having someone else build them for us. Complexity requires upkeep, upkeep requires skill, skill comes from grind, and grind takes time.
I think those with capital are not going to care about this at all, though. Senior software engineers may be over. If there’s problems with a system, management will tell people to rebuild it, then get promoted somewhere else before they can be held accountable for the new system also having problems.
Another interesting paradox is that of invention. LLMs don't innovate - they replicate. We're at our current level of abstraction because a lot of people have, for a long time, thought hard about certain technical issues and how to solve them.