I agree and disagree. It all comes down to how much a human was involved with the code.

If the code is artisan to any degree (authored, edited, reviewed, etc.), it's a bit ridiculous.

It does makes sense to me if the human driver was hands-off the code because the conversation becomes the artifact.

I'm older, and have very mixed feelings about the latter case but it seems inevitable that engineers will be working at a higher level where conversational governance becomes important. We'll stop this charade of hiding AI contributions behind human identities. (Note: I don't think conversation IDs are what we need but it's a step down this path.)