I'll bite, let's grant for the sake of the argument that equaling the LLM with a person holds.

This manager is directly providing an unrelated team with an unprompted 150-file giant PR dumped at once with no previous discussion. Upon questioning, he says the code has been written by an outside contractor he personally chose.

No one has onboarded this contractor to the team, and checking their online presence shows lots of media appearances, but not a single production project in their CV, much less long time maintenance.

A cursory glance at the files reveals that the code contains copypasted code from stackoverflow to the point that the original author's name is still pasted in comments. The manager can not justify this, but doesn't seem bothered by the fact, and insists that the contractors are amazing because he's been following them in social networks and is infatuated with their media there.

Furthermore, you check the manager's history in slack and you see 15 threads of him doing the same for other teams. The ones that have agreed to review their PRs have closed them for being senseless.

How would you be interacting with this guy?

> If a manager says they provided oversight of their developer employees, and the code was not as good as the manager thought, would you say "the manager has had their brain broken by the existence of employees"?

That could be either regular incompetence or a "broken brain." It's more towards latter if the manager had no clue about what was going on, even after having it explained to him.

This guy is equivalent to a manager who hired two bozos to do a job, but insisted it was good because he had them check each other's work and what they made didn't immediately fall down.

...Well, if you want to make an argument for calling them "useless and incompetent", I'd say you have a great point, good manager would at least throw it to QA and/or recruit someone better after failure

Perhaps because the AI assigned copyright in the files to the author of the library it copied from and the person prompting it told it to look at that library. Without even getting into the comedy AI generated apologia to go with it which makes it look worse rather than better.

From a pragmatic viewpoint as an engineer you assign the IP you create over to the company you work for so plagarism has real world potential to lose you your job at best. There's a difference between taking inspiration from something unrelated "oh this is a neat algorithmic approach to solving this class of problems" to "I need to implement this specific feature and it exists in this library so I'll lift it nearly verbatim".

Yes?

That is why some people are forbidden to contribute to projects if their eyes have read projects with incompatible licenses, in case people go to copyright court.