It was a genuine question because I couldn't tell. I responded to your idea that software has to be "perfect" in your other reply so I think we can continue.

You've just been given examples of safer technologies. Especially with LLMs being all knowing code churning machines, you'd expect safer systems to be cheap to build.

You're the one that is inventing this "magical unhackable software/hardware", the other person was just saying that there are ways to write "safer" software, not "safe" software. Anything that has happened looks like no security concerns has been looked at or have been thought about.