Technical debt has long been seen as a necessary evil in software development, where shortcuts taken during the coding process often lead to problems later on. However, the author argues that the landscape is changing due to advancements in large language models (LLMs). With LLMs improving rapidly, the cost of addressing technical debt is decreasing. This shift suggests that taking on more technical debt now might be beneficial, as future LLMs could help clean up any mess created by those shortcuts. The article draws parallels between financial debt and technical debt, emphasizing that not all debt is bad. For instance, taking on debt to invest in tools that generate significant returns can be wise, whereas frivolous debt is wasteful. As LLMs lower the cost of writing code, there's a growing belief that developers can afford to take more shortcuts. The author cites changes in coding principles, explaining that traditional coding best practices may become less relevant as more code is generated and optimized by machines. This shift requires a recalibration of how developers approach coding, especially for less critical projects. The author also critiques the “vibe coder,” who may overestimate the capabilities of technology. While seasoned developers have historically been conservative about tech debt, the rapid evolution of coding tools might make these concerns less pressing. As a result, the article suggests that the industry may be moving into a phase where lower quality software becomes more common, leading to a need for new frameworks to distinguish between valuable and subpar products. The overall message pushes for a reevaluation of coding standards in light of advancing technology and a shifting cost-benefit analysis in software development.