We have enough headlines about LLMs already. Let's just enjoy a cool Lisp site without some AI advocate telling us that non-AI things are irrelevant.
Catch all the security holes while you were reviewing it, or did you leave those to the machine as well?
This, together with grand claims that obviously don't hold up in reality, does make you an AI advocate no matter how much you dislike the label.
If you comment was more measured and had nuanced view, then I'd understand wanting to push back on it. But then you also say stuff like "Even a legacy code base can be poured into an LLM, which will grok it instantly" so no wonder others see you as a AI advocate.
Which LLM can read a whole code base? Embeddings do not count.