Or maybe they are just allowing people to create fixes in their life and the world by writing solutions to their problems
All vibe coding tools are selling a get rich quick scheme
101–104 of 104 posts
Re: All vibe coding tools are selling a get rich quick scheme
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same. I mostly just don't believe people when they say they get good results. Or i guess, i think my definition of "good results" must be very different than other people's. My manager uses cursor and Claude for everything. I can always tell. He pretends like he wrote it himself even, but he obviously didn't. I end up rewriting big chunks of it, or finding all sorts of baffling quirks during review. Idk, I'm just not…
My biggest beef is that I feel like settling for "good enough" is a one way ticket to vulnerability town "Good enough" often has AWS keys embedded into the code itself, stupid things like that I hold myself to a higher standard
You can ask Claude to do OWASP checks and security tests too. You should really go with an open mind.
Re: All vibe coding tools are selling a get rich quick scheme
#103The trick is that you have to be a good coder to get the most out of "vibe" coding. It works great for me, but I deploy all of the knowledge I've acquired over the decades as a professional developer. You need to know how to architect systems, what data structures and algorithms to ask for, how to design a product, many facets of graphic and user interface design, how to parcel out work, how to parallelize tasks. Eve…
In another sense it's like writing Lisp macro expansions and throwing away the macros.
Re: All vibe coding tools are selling a get rich quick scheme
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
This will be a big problem in the future if it means more companies choosing not to hire/train juniors. Eventually all the experienced people will be dead or retired.
Assuming the current way to become senior is the only way? I could still see a select few being given a foot in the door and leaping over the "argh why doesn't it compile" stage, past the "argh, I need a whole new architecture" stage to become senior in a few years. Every cohort has a few unicorns. Alternatively, coding goes the way of the calculator. By that I mean, the people that used to be part of the engineering…
I'm thinking that the calculator analogy is better and better
An LLM will produce a solution for you, but in most cases you need to know enough about the problem to ask it to apply the right tools. Or even have enough "known unknowns" that you can direct it to search for a better solution.
Like a trivial example: an LLM will happily write a CLI argument parser from scratch. It WILL work. It'll also be complete crap UX wise.
But if you know that a specific library (Cobra, Kong, urfave/cli) fits this specific problem better, you can ask it to use it specifically.
Same with calculators - it'll always tell you the correct answer to whatever calculation you give it. But YOU need to know that this specific problem was solved by a really smart person 100 years ago and there's a formula you can apply to solve it faster - still using the calculator, but now you're using refined algebra instead of brute-forcing a solution