11–20 of 47 posts
If it provides value who cares?
I mean we could read the code to see if it does anything nefarious. Or have a bought do a check or checks.
But asking every time there’s a show HN is it vibe coded is such gatekeeping elitest nonsense it makes me angry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why would it be normal? the code is there for you to look at and use or not. It is open-source, licensed as open source and is very clear about that. Why would you feel that the author(s) should need to specify anything else at all to satisfy your curiosity?
There's a Kroger grocery store near my house. It's very convenient -- I'm near it almost every day I'm alive. They have all kinds of things there, including factory-made bread and factory-made eggs. There's also a tiny little Amish bakery that I know of. They make all kinds of things there, but the most interesting to me are the loaves of plain white bread that they bake every day (except Sunday) in their wood-fired…
Looks well done, nice looking TUI. Does not specify if it's vibe coded or not, which I think should be normal practice now ;(
why would it be normal? the code is there for you to look at and use or not. It is open-source, licensed as open source and is very clear about that. Why would you feel that the author(s) should need to specify anything else at all to satisfy your curiosity?
Perhaps this is a matter of different perspectives? Every tool I use is an investment for me, it might be light if I only use it once, it might be heavy if I use it for years. That investment is all the time I take to learn the various concepts involved and how to think about problems to fit the tool. But it is also all the time needed to constantly keep in mind if that tool is affected by the latest security vulnerability, how changing trends in the industry affects my use of the tool, and what to do if the tool becomes abandonware.
Reading code is hard. Writing can sometimes even be faster than reading, especially when there are many unknowns involved. So saying "you can just read it" doesn't really work for me. There's no "just" in reading. Taking in new tools is an investment, a burden, and I am perfectly entitled to avoid tools where that burden is harder than the expected outcome. It's impossible to know for sure, of course, but you can often guess pretty good very early.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why would it be normal? the code is there for you to look at and use or not. It is open-source, licensed as open source and is very clear about that. Why would you feel that the author(s) should need to specify anything else at all to satisfy your curiosity?
There's a Kroger grocery store near my house. It's very convenient -- I'm near it almost every day I'm alive. They have all kinds of things there, including factory-made bread and factory-made eggs. There's also a tiny little Amish bakery that I know of. They make all kinds of things there, but the most interesting to me are the loaves of plain white bread that they bake every day (except Sunday) in their wood-fired…
I am trying to say that when people freely share software with the world, I do not think you are entitled to try to add conditions. People are free to share whatever they like, in the conditions they like - in this case the MIT license. Everybody else is free to take the code AS IS.
There is a difference between a commercial transaction and software which is shared without any expectations in return. With software shared without any expectations in return. I don’t believe that we should be trying to create normal practices on top of existing licences or trying to specify under what conditions somebody can share something
> It's fine when someone cares about that kind of thing. And it's fine if they don't care, too. > We're allowed to like what we like. It's good to have options, and it's OK to prefer one way over another.
I agree and never said anything different, but if somebody wants to share under different conditions, then their conditions will always trump yours
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I'm eating a sausage, I like to be certain that no asbestos was used in its production.
This is a ridiculous analogy. Test the app. Read its source code. Developers could always write toxic instruction in your tools. AI may write inefficient or messy code, but it’s far from nefarious. “Asbestos” code is written intentionally by humans, not unintentionally AI.
Everyone asking was this vibe coded should calm down. Instead we should just have automated ways to audit the code to see if it’s secure, see if it’s going to steal our keys, etc. If it provides value who cares? I mean we could read the code to see if it does anything nefarious. Or have a bought do a check or checks. But asking every time there’s a show HN is it vibe coded is such gatekeeping elitest nonsense it make…
Lots of infected programs provide value. It has nothing to do with being or not being infected.
If a project was vibecoded in a weekend - there are less chances that it will still be maintained in a, say, year or two.
Everyone asking was this vibe coded should calm down. Instead we should just have automated ways to audit the code to see if it’s secure, see if it’s going to steal our keys, etc. If it provides value who cares? I mean we could read the code to see if it does anything nefarious. Or have a bought do a check or checks. But asking every time there’s a show HN is it vibe coded is such gatekeeping elitest nonsense it make…
I do. I care. And there are dozens of us. Lots of infected programs provide value. It has nothing to do with being or not being infected. If a project was vibecoded in a weekend - there are less chances that it will still be maintained in a, say, year or two.
Everyone asking was this vibe coded should calm down. Instead we should just have automated ways to audit the code to see if it’s secure, see if it’s going to steal our keys, etc. If it provides value who cares? I mean we could read the code to see if it does anything nefarious. Or have a bought do a check or checks. But asking every time there’s a show HN is it vibe coded is such gatekeeping elitest nonsense it make…
I do. I care. And there are dozens of us. Lots of infected programs provide value. It has nothing to do with being or not being infected. If a project was vibecoded in a weekend - there are less chances that it will still be maintained in a, say, year or two.
Everyone asking was this vibe coded should calm down. Instead we should just have automated ways to audit the code to see if it’s secure, see if it’s going to steal our keys, etc. If it provides value who cares? I mean we could read the code to see if it does anything nefarious. Or have a bought do a check or checks. But asking every time there’s a show HN is it vibe coded is such gatekeeping elitest nonsense it make…
It's ok for people to just hate things. I hate spinach for example. Listing all the reasons that my distaste for spinach is irrational won't change that.
Similarly, explaining to the new amish that AI with TDD writess better code than most of the devs I know isn't going to get you anywhere. They don't really care about code quality at all. It's a religious or political belief.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a ridiculous analogy. Test the app. Read its source code. Developers could always write toxic instruction in your tools. AI may write inefficient or messy code, but it’s far from nefarious. “Asbestos” code is written intentionally by humans, not unintentionally AI.
That's a good way to guarantee nobody will use it. Who is going to test the app in a sandbox with godknowswhat kind of tooling needed to find malicious behavior and read the code? For a tool that's convenient once per decade?