Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vibecoders Can't Build for Longevity

blog.d11r.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 38 posts

Re: Vibecoders Can't Build for Longevity

#11

Post by ting0 »

graphememes wrote: post #4

I think the existing comments already cover it most, also, I would argue that we are seeing a new emerging group of coders come into the realm of programming and we are judging them at their worst and comparing them to our best. It is quite insane to me to expect someone who just started to fully build google.com and all of it's infra,security,etc.

You're right that there are a new group of coders that are coming in, which is opening its own new can of worms. However, even experienced coders are still producing slop. The difference between slop and quality seems to be how much you baby the LLM, carefully pay attention to its outputs and its behavior, and stringently test everything produced. The more auto-pilot, the worse the result. The larger the code-base, the worse the result. LLMs are death by a thousand cuts unless you take the effort to manually comb through and remove the tech debt at checkpoints.

Re: Vibecoders Can't Build for Longevity

#12

Post by ting0 »

codingblink wrote: post #6
blinkbat wrote: post #3

> If you keep vibe-adding features, and somehow keep getting customers to pay for this thing, what happens once the codebase becomes so complex that an LLM cannot fit it inside its “brain”? you realize this point is well, well beyond what a human can "fit" in their brain as well? you start making shorthands and assumptions about your systems once they get too large.

One of the main weaknesses with current AI is they don't know how to modularize unless you explicitly say it in their prompt, or they will modularize but "forget" they included a feature in file B, so they redundantly type it in file A, causing features to break further down the line. Modularizing code is important and a lot of devs will learn this, I once had 2k-line files at the beginning of my career (this was bef…

There needs to be a better harness than what we have. It feels like we're in the stone age with Claude Code etc.

Having control over the harness locally, and combining it with local inference and analysis, seems to be the way forward.

The modularization and maintaining the abstraction are the main things that result in slop. That also requires deterministic memory though.

Re: Vibecoders Can't Build for Longevity

#15

Post by reverius42 »

ting0 wrote: post #10

If you want proof that there's a serious issue with vibe-coding over the long-term, all you need to do is be a Claude Code user and see how for every release they make they either create 5 new bugs, or re-introduce 5 they've already patched 15 times over the last year. The creators of Claude can't even vibe-code well. Claude Code is one of the sloppiest, least stable tools I've ever used. Anthropic has already proudl…

As a user of Claude Code...

I wouldn't use it to write anything mission critical like calculating the trajectory of a NASA spacecraft or something.

But there's tons of software out there that's equal or lower quality to Claude Code itself, or to what you can make with Claude Code, that is useful and serving a purpose. "Quality" is always relative to what is needed, what the market will bear, etc.

Re: Vibecoders Can't Build for Longevity

#16

Post by reverius42 »

ting0 wrote: post #11
graphememes wrote: post #4

I think the existing comments already cover it most, also, I would argue that we are seeing a new emerging group of coders come into the realm of programming and we are judging them at their worst and comparing them to our best. It is quite insane to me to expect someone who just started to fully build google.com and all of it's infra,security,etc.

You're right that there are a new group of coders that are coming in, which is opening its own new can of worms. However, even experienced coders are still producing slop. The difference between slop and quality seems to be how much you baby the LLM, carefully pay attention to its outputs and its behavior, and stringently test everything produced. The more auto-pilot, the worse the result. The larger the code-base, t…

My mental model of "Claude is a 19 year old intern who never gets tired but is very overconfident" never fails.

Would you hand off some of your well defined tasks to your diligent 19 year old intern? Sure! Would you check their work? Of course!

Would you hand off all of a major tech company to be entirely built by interns? Of course not!

Re: Vibecoders Can't Build for Longevity

#17

Post by reverius42 »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #8
graphememes wrote: post #4

I think the existing comments already cover it most, also, I would argue that we are seeing a new emerging group of coders come into the realm of programming and we are judging them at their worst and comparing them to our best. It is quite insane to me to expect someone who just started to fully build google.com and all of it's infra,security,etc.

> I would argue that we are seeing a new emerging group of coders come into the realm of programming and we are judging them at their worst and comparing them to our best. Maybe, but the world seems to be inviting this comparison by acting as though they are going to disrupt and replace the established experienced coders The judgement and pushback is pretty warranted

It's a little more nuanced than this. Claude can't actually replace an experienced coder, but in two steps:

1. Claude makes every experienced coder more productive, 2. The industry decides to hire fewer experienced coders to get the same level of productivity,

We have now accomplished putting some large percentage of experienced coders out of work without actually replicating what they do.

It is, however, making me a bit crazy that the industry's response to (presumed!) increased productivity has been to cut costs rather than invest more broadly and deeply in software.

Re: Vibecoders Can't Build for Longevity

#18

Post by bluefirebrand »

reverius42 wrote: post #17
bluefirebrand wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would argue that we are seeing a new emerging group of coders come into the realm of programming and we are judging them at their worst and comparing them to our best. Maybe, but the world seems to be inviting this comparison by acting as though they are going to disrupt and replace the established experienced coders The judgement and pushback is pretty warranted

It's a little more nuanced than this. Claude can't actually replace an experienced coder, but in two steps: 1. Claude makes every experienced coder more productive, 2. The industry decides to hire fewer experienced coders to get the same level of productivity, We have now accomplished putting some large percentage of experienced coders out of work without actually replicating what they do. It is, however, making me a…

> It is, however, making me a bit crazy that the industry's response to (presumed!) increased productivity has been to cut costs rather than invest more broadly and deeply in software

It's almost like they don't actually believe (or care if) it is increasing productivity and are just using it as an excuse to cut costs

Re: Vibecoders Can't Build for Longevity

#19

Post by reverius42 »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #18
reverius42 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little more nuanced than this. Claude can't actually replace an experienced coder, but in two steps: 1. Claude makes every experienced coder more productive, 2. The industry decides to hire fewer experienced coders to get the same level of productivity, We have now accomplished putting some large percentage of experienced coders out of work without actually replicating what they do. It is, however, making me a…

> It is, however, making me a bit crazy that the industry's response to (presumed!) increased productivity has been to cut costs rather than invest more broadly and deeply in software It's almost like they don't actually believe (or care if) it is increasing productivity and are just using it as an excuse to cut costs

Still doesn't make sense to me then, even ignoring AI -- why are they cutting costs while making record revenues and profits?
Post reply on HN