Live data from Hacker News

I'm helping my dog vibe code games

calebleak.com

231–240 of 404 posts

Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games

#232
post #36
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny? I liked it.

Funny is subjective, I should just have moved on and ignored this but I couldn't help myself, this is so irritating. It's a prompt that makes an LLM turn iuqefxygn9urg0fh1 into a little Godot game. It's like a slot machine with no payoff, and the dog component is slapped on top of it and makes no difference whatsoever in the project.

that's all llms tools are, slot machines for idea guys.

Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games

#233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still can’t believe Altman said that. I mean I can, but still.

I can because I have also used similar arguments. There are people who say that you should use a real artist instead of AI due to AI's water use. Yet in actuality asking a human to draw something will require more water. There are people who think AI uses more resources than humans which is why it must be said.

> a human to draw something will require more water.

That human would require the same amount of water whether you ask them to draw or not, and would exist anyway because they are not born for productivity reasons. "Creation" of humans isn't driven by the amount of work to accomplish.

You are not causing more water to be used by asking a human to work on something.

Same for energy consumption.

This argument doesn't work at all.

What you do for humans to use fewer resources is to work on making us produce less garbage, and produce things using techniques that are less resource-intensive.

Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games

#234
post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the article’s title is definitely clickbait. The author didn’t teach his dog to vibe code games (that’s what the title on the blog is) – he taught his dog to be rewarded when he types random keystrokes on the keyboard. The vibe-coding is inconsequential – the dog doesn’t play the game, he’s just in it for the treats –, the author just wants the attention because he gets people to believe the dog DID vibe code. It…

It's interesting as commentary, if you choose to read into it as if it were analogous to vibecoding by humans.

Doesn't matter, I don't consent to misleading titles influencing what articles I choose to read.

Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games

#235
post #37

the real takeaway is buried at the bottom: "the magic isn't in the input, it's in the system around it." random keystrokes producing playable games means the input barely matters anymore. we're basically at the point where the engineering is in the scaffolding, not the prompting.

I think this misses something. The output here is something not the thing. Yes the scaffolding is important, but the requirements are even more important. You need crystal clear requirements + great scaffolding and then the implementation becomes mechanical.

Re: I'm helping my dog vibe code games

#238
post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can because I have also used similar arguments. There are people who say that you should use a real artist instead of AI due to AI's water use. Yet in actuality asking a human to draw something will require more water. There are people who think AI uses more resources than humans which is why it must be said.

> a human to draw something will require more water. That human would require the same amount of water whether you ask them to draw or not, and would exist anyway because they are not born for productivity reasons. "Creation" of humans isn't driven by the amount of work to accomplish. You are not causing more water to be used by asking a human to work on something. Same for energy consumption. This argument doesn't w…

> You are not causing more water to be used by asking a human to work on something.

That's certainly not true. Asking me to think hard about something will cause me to burn more calories. Asking me to do physical work even more so.

Post reply on HN