What makes their position tribialism and not yours?

It's more like the Amish not using certain technology we all take for granted.

I see this much broader: opting out of certain technologies.

As a vegan I opt out of all animal domestication/husbandry and wild catch/hunt.

And I try to stay away from refined sugar and refined starches.

Abortion is also a technology people feel strongly about.

And now we have the use of AI.

Did we also have people that did not want to use an electronic calculator when it just came out? Probably.

> I want software that is brilliant and well audited, no matter who or what produced it.

Not caring about ethics is selfish.

The AI tribe backed by $billions of influencer money calls others "tribal".

Can the AI people even devise an original argument by themselves or do they always just plagiarize and flip them?

I think most people see the issue there with the "well audited" part. You didn't know which developers just copy pasted stack overflow code together before either, but the rate at which that code came in was manageable for reviews, and supplementing reviews with AI doesn't really lower the concern for people concerned about the quality of the code.

The alternative would be to rely on self-policing, which is a bad idea. Not even because you can't trust people to not be lazy, but simply because there's also actively bad actors involved.

If the code is well reviewed/audited, of course it doesn't really matter or not if it was hand-typed or generated, it's (at least for me) more of a question on how to manage quality control.

> No AI guarantees nothing

No, but it does significantly increase the likelihood that the software will be good. Stuff people wrote with LLMs is on average much worse than stuff people wrote themselves.

> I want software that is brilliant and well audited, no matter who or what produced it.

As it turns out, "AI code" is a synonym for non brilliant and non audited code.