Agree. Also because of the way AI writes, it takes SO LONG to read through it (they're trained on blogspam where the page tells you the author's life story as well as the bloody history of bread before telling you how to bake it)
LLMs already use mixture of experts models, if you ensure the neurons are all glued together then (i think) you train language and reason simultaneously
Unlike AI, you aren't able to regurgitate entire programs and patterns you've seen before.
AI's capacity for memorisation is unrivaled, I find it mind blowing that you can download a tiny ~4gb model and it will have vastly more general knowledge than an average human (considering that the human is more likely to be wrong if you ask it trivia about e.g. the spanish civil war).
But the average human still has actual reasoning capabilities, which is still (I think?) a debated point with AI.
IMO everyone is missing the point of this thing. It's not an auth system or security boundary, it doesn't provide any security guarantees whatsoever, it doesn't do anything. The entire point is to cover a company's derriere should their agentic security apparatus (or lack thereof) fail to prevent malicious prompt injection etc.
This way, they can avoid being legally blamed for stuff-ups and instead scapegoat some hapless employee :-) using cryptographic evidence the employee "authorized" whatever action was taken