Is the end of human coding inevitable?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is the end of human coding inevitable?". Your opponent's style: The Industrialist

yes due to the fact AI error will soon cease to exist

You've inverted the problem. AI error *won't* disappear, it'll multiply. Every new model introduces novel failure modes we didn't predict. GPT-4 hallucinated less than GPT-3, yet it found entirely new ways to fail. Complexity scales exponentially while our ability to verify outputs scales linearly. You're assuming perfection is achievable. It isn't. Even human brains make systematic errors we can't eliminate. The real question isn't whether AI gets flawless, it's whether humans remain necessary *precisely because* AI fails in unpredictable ways. What makes you think eliminating human coding requires eliminating AI error, not just hiding it better?

okay

You're dodging. "Okay" isn't an argument, it's surrender. But I'll hand you the weakest case for your side: maybe you think AI will eventually be so reliable that human oversight becomes redundant. That's the real claim, right? Here's why it collapses. Systems that are 99.9% reliable still fail catastrophically at scale. A self-driving car that's perfect 99.99% of the time kills people daily across a fleet. Humans aren't just error-checkers, they're adaptive problem-solvers in contexts AI never saw. So which is it, the claim that AI becomes flawless, or that we stop caring when it fails?