Thank you. Good point, but I did not mention anything about "auditing" but: "developing", "accountability", "art", and "mind".

There's no "religion" nor "subjectivity" here, and I have no issues with any developer who uses LLM for reviewing and auditing if they have no time or don't know anyone nor participate in Communities who will support a project in the subjects required.

If you still develop with your mind, accoutnability, creativity, and effort towards actually learning, getting valuable experience, and always prioritize a human, art, and effort, you should better know when use an LLM and when not, considering an undefined magnitude of marvelous knowledge, people, and experience you will definitely miss meanwhile, possibly remembering nothing and have no idea what you're doing at all alongside the non-accountable and prone to nonsense algorithm as LLM.

For example, if you do not consider the meat-ground miracles and artworks inside a yet another "free"/sold LLM dataset of now defaced/unknown artists, developers, engineers mentioned, people (like you and me), then if you prompt for a case to audit, require all sources to the evidence/suggestions found, carefully read the output, and manually approach it making notes to learn from and base your future on, it still may be considered an accountable development process.