Honestly it's a pattern when arguing about the topic :
- wow AI is amazing!
- OK, why?
- because it can do so much stuff! I'm making so much projects and earning a lot!
- cool, care to share a link to anything?
- ... radio silence or yet another NES emulator or something that is clearly so curated it might have taken more work than without any "AI assistance"
If you don't want field questions about it, don't brag about it?
Equally, to your condemnation: the problem with AI enjoyers is they claim it's nearly perfect, and it can do everything, and it makes them so much faster. But every example is barely more than boilerplate, or it's a sham.
I'm not even OP so I don't know of it applies to them, but the above applies to me and it's been extremely helpful to me.
Someone to claim, honestly. They've created something they take pride in, something they feel to them, is impressive. That they couldn't have done without AI.
And then for it to appear to anyone that looks, that the thing they're proud of is obviously, and meaningfully significant such that it' couldn't be considered by anyone half reasonable to be boilerplate. And then, ideally but not required; for me to not feel embarrassed by proxy for them, when they claim they're proud of the AI supported output.
Surely, if it's as helpful, and as revolutionary as the current fervor claims. Someone, or anyone, should be willing to say. Look at this commit. Look at this project, look at this repo. I'm proud of it, and I want everyone to know I'm proud of it. And I wouldn't have been able to to it with out the support of an LLM? At least someone would have created something, they wish to release into the open source world. And claim they take pride in it?