If I had to guess, I would say that what you meant was that LLMs can be used to produce worse code and worse programmers, and we don't want that.
And then somehow consider that because LLMs can make bad programmers worse, it has to mean that it will make all programmers worse. And therefore Linus Torvalds using LLMs will necessarily make Linux worse.
Something like this?
> You know it won't be properly reviewed and understood.
This reads a bit weird in hindsight but what I meant was it just feels like that to me.
> I'm not saying other people can't possibly use LLMs to generate code effectively but it seems super suspicious from my experience as it triggers laziness and reluctance to put effort into understanding every piece of code.
This part is my personal experience with trying to use LLMs for code review and sometimes to write a bit of code via opencode.
> diligent but low IQ and mediocre skill
This is how I see LLMs.
In my personal experience, it is not worth to make it write code because then reviewing the code becomes more work than actually writing myself and get LLM review + fix and review again myself.
It can be very good at writing code but the instances where it messes up just cost too much for me to disentangle and making it write things I don't understand doesn't work because I can't review.
I can't judge Linus Torvald's ability but this is my perspective so if I had to guess, I would guess that it isn't necessarily efficient for him to generate code with an LLM because he is spending more time reviewing it compared to him writing the code.