Until very recently, good code has been the differentiating factor between good software and great. In 2026, that changed, with the expanding capabilities of computers to generate code on a par or in excess of the abilities of many software developers.
One positive benefit of this is that it expands the overall capabilities of individual software makers far beyond their skillset. It’s still important that software code functions, that it is tested, verified, and audited. Good software development practices still matter, LLM tools themselves are also very good at following good practices if directed toward them, of reviewing their own work, refactoring, and systematically following process.
When code is no longer the asset it once was, the value of a system shifts. If code is no longer the asset, the new asset is: what is the system supposed to do? The measure is: does it do what it is supposed to do?
Imagine as a user of a system, you were able to evaluate the decisions that went into shaping the system, both well-intentioned and the not-so-well intentioned. "Intent is the system" leads to asking whether these kinds of things are possible. What if, in addition to the code, we shared the ideas that led to the code? This leads to open record-keeping, like an open prompt ledger for AI-created systems, and potentially an open decision ledger for non-AI systems.