The argument that you're ignoring is about whether they're ethical or not. Your priors may land you on either side of that argument, but ideally you're willing to have your mind changed if the other side makes a strong enough case.

But intentionally blinding yourself to the debate and plowing ahead anyway (which is how I interpreted your parent comment) sounds like willful ignorance.

"No u" isn't a valid counter argument. Arguer made no assumption about your view of the ethics of LLMs.

That's what the sand bucket was about.