By writing a not-identical, but valid, solution? Any modestly complex engineering problem has many solutions.

This is an obvious example of why LLM training is so different than human learning.

I mean people expect a model to give a working solution. They also expect it to provide it in as few tokens as possible (input/output). They might expect it to come up with an original solution, but I don't think most people would compromise on the first two points.

I expect any well-informed corporate lawyer that has thought about this carefully is strongly advising that these tools not be used. When the LLM [0] barfs up some nontrivial code that's covered by the AGPL and your company's devs put it into the company's "all rights reserved" codebase -entirely unaware of its provenance- it's going to be a nightmare to come back from that.

[0] ...that Nvidia's CEO says they should be spending 50% of a senior dev's salary per seat per year on...