Sure and lots of times I can walk places. That doesn't mean bikes, cars, trains and planes aren't incredibly useful. They let me achieve things I can't in other ways for example transporting cargo without a team of people to help me. Just like AI coding.

Yet replacing walking with cars is often cited as one of the reasons for many of society's ills.

Yet no one seriously declares motor vehicles as useless.

Many who live in sufficiently-walkable areas don't have one and are actively opposed to getting one

There is a middle road.

America went full car to a point where just going to the shops from the suburbs is a car drive. Crossing the ROAD needs a car in way too many places.

There are cities where you can find a shop for essentials within walking distance, bigger shops need a short to medium drive, but can be still walked to if you really want to.

Maybe your analogy holds if driving and walking took the same amount of time.

Plus "planning, implementing, validating, and reviewing" would be a bit like walking anyway in your analogy.

Would you still use your car if you ended up in the wrong destination half the time?

Yes, because I can drive to the other end of the state in an afternoon. Then if I get lost, I can just course correct.

Generating lots of pollution, cost, jams, noise and accidents globally. Not all cities need to be made for cars, right tool for the job etc.

Have fun getting stuck in a loop when it insists your destination exists in a place it doesn't.

Would you use your car if you ended up in the right destination 100% - epsilon of the time? Yes, you would.

Or do you suppose this is the best AI will ever get?

Parent wasn't referring to a possible future, but present time. If we get AI I can trust 100% that's another discussion. For now I don't see it and I don't think LLMs are the solution to that problem, but we'll see.