Comment by KurSix

The chess analogy is fundamentally flawed. In chess you don't have to maintain your moves - you make a move, and it's done. In engineering code isn't the end of the game, it's the start of a liability.

Code is read 10x more often than it is written. A programmer's primary job isn't "making the computer do X," but "explaining to other programmers (and their future self) why the computer should do X." AI generates syntax, but it lacks intent.

Refusing to accept such code isn't snobbery or fear. It's a refusal to take ownership of an asset that has lost its documentation regarding provenance and meaning