Of course. But it's tough when you're faced with a wall of intense criticism that tests your will so intensely. And very few encouragements or positive criticism for the advantages obtained using AI.
It is tough because AI interaction is low effort. You did not have to invest much in order to produce these plans for a hypothetical project.
In perspective, you prompt it, and it throws back wall of text. You can ponder on it a bit, and then you turn it to someone with actual programming and domain knowledge. They will take time, to understand what LLM outputed, and give you a comment or a piece of code. It may take an hour. Then you take that and just throw it back to LLM and in 5 seconds it spits out twice larger, 80% changed wall of text. Now you look that, understand even less than before, and transfer it to the 'developer' who will now take 3 hours to analyze and try to fix something per your requirement.
Do you see how this refuses to scale up?
Inside three or four cycles of back and forth the developer will simply stop to use his own brain to do work and just prompt his own AI.
If you are not following what is happening in the software engineering you didn't pick up this has been tried few years ago and fell on its ass. Non-programmers like product owners, project managers, CEOs, whatever, supposed they can prompt the LLM because they have "overall knowledge how project works" to achieve new features or bug fixes. They supposed, seniors would occasionally have to clean up after, just like if junior was grinding instead of LLM. Wrong, never worked, failed miserably.
There is no mixing of human brain and AI. It is brain or AI. A lot of development companies are now straight AI - their developers steer, don't program. You can't be them, because you lack the background knowledge and experience, and you really don't want to be them, because their programming brain is going to rot via that usage pattern.
Also, the definition of "ownership" in software engineering doesn't mean one that has licence over the code. When I say you don't own your AI code, I don't mean you don't legally own it, but mentally. It comes from English expression of "owning ones choices or decisions" eg having control of something. A non programmer simply cannot have control of the code project spitted out by spinning the LLM machine, it's an oxymoron. Even programmers refuse to own the LLM code because nobody wants to own Pandoras boxes