This kind of "purity" argument is absolutely toxic. We've seen it with the vietnam paper comparing ORMs to SQL, etc. etc. Please stop this. You didn't hire him, you certainly aren't willing to give him a salary for him to live off of.
If you want to complain about LLMs used in software, advocate for a voluntary LLM disclosure published in the docs someplace, so people can make informed decisions.
No, not really. If you used an LLM you didn't actually make anything. It's like if one commissions a work of art: yes, it wouldn't exist if not for your actions, but no, you didn't make it.
Oh my. Don't you think that code generated by an LLM has nothing to do with "hackers"? And once/if you realize that, don't you immediately see that they're right? Maybe not in the way they say it, but otherwise - they're absolutely right.
I mean, just think about cameras and photography. there's talented photographers, they know how to adjust cameras, they understanding lighting and composition, and yet the camera is what is actually producing the photo... but it's not taboo at all, for anyone to claim credit for taking a photo, no matter their skill level or the quality of the result. It's generally accepted that 'using the tool' is part of the process.
if someone said "i created this photo" it might sound like an odd choice of words, but you wouldn't find the need to 'set them straight' by explaining their camera is actually what created the photo.
you can be a hater all you want, but you're just as annoying as the thousands of vibe-coded projects that are annoying you.
