I thought they were saying the defense was like defenses of gpt-3, that it will be good someday, or it's good if you are very selective about the output, not that your comment was poorly written.

One of those readings is just musing about the state of all this "almost there" tech, the other is just randomly insulting someone's writing.

That does seem like pretty dangerous ambiguity. Akiselev maybe wrote a blue gold dress of comments where one reading is mean-spirited. I doubt it was intentional, but could have been clearer.