You are overstating those sources. That alone makes me doubt that you're engaging in this discussion in good faith.

I read them all, and in none of them do any of the three say that they "regularly use LLMs for development".

Carmack is speculating about how the technology will develop. And Carmack has a vested interest in AI, so I would not put any value on this as an "engineers opinion".

Torvalds has vibe coded one visualizer for a hobby project. That's within what I might use to test out LLM output: simple, inconsequential, contained. There's no indication in that article that Linus is using LLMs for any serious development work.

Knuth is reporting about somebody else using LLMs for mathematical proofs. The domain of mathematical proofs is much more suitable for LLM work, because the LLM can be guided by checking the correctness of proofs.

And Knuth himself only used the partial proof sent in by someone else as inspiration for a handcrafted proof.

I don't mind arguing this case with you, but please don't fabricate facts. That's dishonest