This is such a bullshit take. Yeah, “open source models” exist, and someone probably uses them for something. Most of the slop being commited is generated by the big ones though. Because, as any sloperator will tell you, only the latest and greatest claude is actually good, and all the problems with your slop is because you didn’t use the latest the bestest. So while most of the slop is generated by big corpos, we need to talk about evils of big slopgen corpos, and how they impact the world.
And when you say “yeah, who cares, if we can use it we need to use it”, you’re vouching for this shit, you’re putting your voice, your money, your support, to worst people that own the worst companies.

There are, broadly speaking, two categories of problems with LLM generated code (well, everything, but code here specifically). One is purely technical, does it bring anything to the process, does it broadly speaking saves you time or effort. And the second is everything else: environmental impact, the bubble of it all, the consolidation of power to all the worst people, erosion of skills, death of education, inflation of prices of consumer electronics, psychological impact, and so so so much more, all lumped together as non-technical downsides.
A bunch of llm-proponents, and here we sadly have to include even Linus, are only engaged with the first category of problems, throwing the whole second category aside as “irrelevant”. And a lot of those people are smart enough so I don’t believe they don’t see this.
If there was only the problem of the tool being kinda shitty but useful for some people, I wouldn’t be so against it. I still don’t believe they actually benefit from it, but if they think they do, I’m not going to argue with them about it.
But it’s fundamentally not true. You can’t ignore the second category in your evaluation. To quote Linus himself,

But the solution is not to put your head in the sand and sing “La La La, I can’t hear you” at the top of your voice like some people seem to do

about the fact that even one of the downsides from the second category makes the whole “but I, a person with 40 years of experience, can use llm in such a way that it sometimes produces some benefit” not worth it. No benefit of it is worth the fact that the new generation of junior developers don’t know how to write code on a fundamental level, while elon mask owns all of humanity’s personal data and can do whatever he wants with it. Even if those benefits were kinda big, it wouldn’t worth it, but they aren’t.

If you don’t read, nothing is good for you, you’ll kill all distros if you don’t care and aren’t willing to learn

LLMs are tools and, like all tools, are more fit for some purposes than others

This is the whole problem, this take is disingenuous. Nobody who actually argues in good faith and knows what they’re talking about, argues that LLM isn’t a tool, or it’s something bigger than that. The argument that is being ignored is that LLM is a tool that inherently has downsides that are bringing more “bad” than it brings “good” when it’s useful. But proponents successfully argue that they can use LLM with some benefits, and act like they answered something, and any retaliation to that is unreasonable.
My favourite analogy is asbestos, and I say it as a huge disservice to asbestos. Asbestos is an amazing material that legit has many very important uses (way more than any LLM will ever have), but we’re not using it because we understand that no matter how great of a insulator it is, and how nice it looks as snow replacement on a movie set, and how wonderful it is in a cigarette filter, the supercancer it causes kinda nullifies all that.

and can be used to amplify good work too.

But at this point I would argue the downsides aren’t worth it. Especially when the bubble pops, subsidies run out, and people will be forced to pay the actual price

That’s one group. The “electoralism is bad something something both sides” purity-testers is another.

The amount of anti-democracy statements online is so strong, especially on the online left, I bet a lot of those protesters don’t vote on principal. The irony of protesting what they helped to bring rarely hits those people.