Is it responsible to publish software libraries built in this [AI] way?

What's important here is making it very clear to potential users what they should expect from that software. I've started publishing my AI-generated and not 100% reviewed libraries as alphas, which I'm tentatively thinking of as "alpha slop". I'll take the alpha label off once I've used them in production to the point that I'm willing to stake my reputation on them being decent implementations, and I'll slap a 1.0 version number when I'm confident that they are a solid bet for other people to depend on. I think that's the responsible way to handle this.

This may only be valuable at this particular moment in history, but it feels like a good way to signal that the library might be useful to some people, but has not been battle tested.

As many have already discussed - code is becoming cheaper and cheaper to produce, right now, this still comes at the cost of quality. However that doesn't mean the ideas aren't quality. Easier code, means more ideas being executed on, even if poorly, and that feels valuable. The alpha-slop flag feels like a good way to flag this sort of "I needed to get this idea out fast" code.