Bad take. It's not that it's hard for everyone - there's critical pushback because we don't know for certain if LLM technology can or cannot do the task in question. Which is the reason there's a paper being discussed.
If we were to take the stance of "ok, that happened so it must be the case" we wouldn't be better off in many cases, we would still be accusing people of being witches most likely.
Science is about coming up with a theory and trying to poke holes into it until you can't and in which case, after careful peer-review to ensure you're not just tricking yourself into seeing something which isn't there a consensus is approached in which we can continue to build more truth and knowledge.
If we were to take the stance of "ok, that happened so it must be the case" we wouldn't be better off in many cases, we would still be accusing people of being witches most likely.
Science is about coming up with a theory and trying to poke holes into it until you can't and in which case, after careful peer-review to ensure you're not just tricking yourself into seeing something which isn't there a consensus is approached in which we can continue to build more truth and knowledge.