It’s misleading. Imagine this same analogy for computer programs. Instead of genetic code, considers bits. Some author without understanding of how code works

It’s misleading. Imagine this same analogy for computer programs. Instead of genetic code, considers bits. Some author without understanding of how code works finds a small matching bit sequence in two different executables, then implies that the shared sequence is evidence of some conspiracy. As a programmer you’d know that the bits of a program aren’t random because they actually do something specific for the programs execution, so it’s not surprising that different programs would share short bit sequences. But someone who doesn’t understand programming might assume it’s legitimate evidence of a conspiracy. Same thing is happening here. Genetic code isn’t random because it corresponds to specific functions. It’s not surprising that different viruses would end up sharing bits of genetic sequence if they have similar functions. The author is misusing statistics for random distributions on something that isn’t random. Don’t take them seriously.