That argument still stands, and is still right. Compilers do allow for some programmers to remain uninformed about the actual behaviour of the code they write and this has allowed for a number of actual harms in the outcome of code. (see: Fujitsu computers floating point errors and the British Postal System's persecution of her own Postmasters as one example among many cases) Also, the most performant code either has to be written such that a compiler doesn't incorrectly unroll it's loops or otherwise mangle the intent, or it has to be fine tuned after the fact to correct such mangling. Even Linus does this for the kernel in some cases.

So, drawing the parallel, 'these are the new garbage' but 'old garbage became acceptable so we should accept the new garbage' as an argument in support of being a meat proxy for Markovian stochastic lossy compression-decompression chatbots is isn't very persuasive, especially among this community with a greater concentration of systems level programmers than the general population.

That being said, i think both chatbots and compilers have a specific level of utility; neither of them should have unrestricted access to production filesystems or networks. That way be dragons.