[…] He used unproven error-prone technology […]

I’d say, there was plenty of time for people, including Linus, to understand its limits, especially considering that before introducing current AI policy to the kernel maintainers, he used it for his personal project.

Human-written code is just as error-prone and unreliable, even if it is written by the most experienced dev there is. Do i really need to explain that your own ability to write quality code varies, based off countless factors that affect your mental state? John Dev didn’t have his breakfast — boom! Uncaught race condition, segfault, or some other critical bug, or safety vulnerability is introduced into prod.

What i’m saying is, unreliability of the submitted code is a problem as old as coding itself. It’s a well known one, hence all the static analysis tools developed over the decades, code reviews, hell, even opensource itself partially exists to solve this very issue. The fact that the bugs were caught is the living proof of just that.

If Linus was as smart as you seem to believe […]

“Smart” doesn’t mean “omniscient”, doesn’t mean “makes no mistakes”. “Smart” is not some kind of divine status. He’s still human, he still gets tired, his focus still can dwindle, and important things still slip his mind.

The code looked good, he got fooled and here we are.

That’s your speculation, probably based off your own experience. Neither of us know the exact circumstances, by which the discussed bugs were introduced.