In most domains agents are now better than humans at finding bugs.

What David Heinemeier Hansson actually said

Do you hold this korrent?Do you also believe this?

In tension with

However capable AI coding tools become, the industry will still need junior programmers, because someone must be able to vet what the machine produces.

Hansson’s argument for keeping junior programmers is that someone must be able to vet what the machine produces. Sixteen months later he holds that the machine is better at that vetting than the humans are. The conclusion can survive — juniors become seniors, and that pipeline has other justifications — but the reason he gave for it does not.
In tension with

In an agent-written codebase the agent-written tests are equally untrustworthy; manually using the product is the only reliable measure of whether it works.

Hansson says agents are now better than humans at finding bugs in most domains. Zechner says the tests an agent writes for agent-written code are as untrustworthy as the code, and that manually using the product is the only reliable measure left. Better at finding bugs and unable to certify its own work are compatible, and the gap is exactly where a team decides how much to review.

Shared subject first, then similar wording. They may agree or disagree.