Sorry to say that I don't understand where "important" came from. You gave examples on how LLMs can make learning to code more productive, but there's essentially nothing there about importance. The closest seems to be this:
> There is a perception that you can just prompt an LLM and ship an app. Yes, you can produce something. But what you have is an artifact, not software. The moment you need to tweak it, if you don't understand programming, you are stuck.
But it's unsubstantiated (I personally have seen coworkers with no proper coding skills iterate quite effectively), and even if there is a real limitation at the moment, you would need to do a lot more work to show that the issue is fundamental and won't be fully addressed by Claude 5 with the "I deal with the goddamn customers so the engineers don't have to" skill.
At best, even if we were to accept that LLM-based AIs will never do good software engineering, then at most you get to "LLMs make learning to code as important" ; I don't see how you can get to "more important".
For what it's worth, I personally think you might be right in your claim, but you need to engage with the actual issue in order to argue against it.
