> In my company I feel that we getting totally overrun with code that's 90% good, 10% broken and almost exactly what was needed.

This is painfully similar to what happens when a team grows from 3 developers to 10 developers. All of sudden, there's a vast pile of coding being written, you've never seen 75% of it, your architectural coherence is down, and you're relying a lot more on policy and CI.

Where LLM's differ is that you can't meaningfully mentor them, and you can't let them go after the 50th time they try turn off the type checker, or delete the unit tests to hide bugs.

Probably, the most effective way to use LLMs is to make the person driving the LLM 100% responsible for the consequences. Which would mean actually knowing the code that gets generated. But that's going to be complicated to ensure.