Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feels like a No True Scotsman fallacy.
How so? The property Scotsman is existing a priori and then a causality to behaviour is assumed. But here the term is defined by behaviour.
[deleted]
How do we stop vibe coding?
81–90 of 90 posts
Re: How do we stop vibe coding?
#82Howabout: just turn off AI. I scanned the article, never made it to the bottom, didn’t find the point the author was trying to make. Howabout just learning to code better as a human without using AI. Just like learning a craft. Just refuse to use AI. Not possible because of peer pressure? Well then stop worrying and continue to vibe. Either stop or stop complaining but don’t make excuses or write long articles that r…
Someone wrote about a practice they called "rawdog Thursdays".
That is every Thursday they write all their code without any AI assistant (not even the AI inline code suggestions).
Allows them to maintain their craft and keep their codebase human maintainable, while still benefitting from the productivity boost of SOTA AI agents.
Re: How do we stop vibe coding?
#83Disagree with so many assertions put forth here. You don't _have_ to turn you brain off when coding with an LLM. It's not some intelligence dementor. If your brain turned off while you were vibe coding thats honestly just a you problem and I wish everyone would stop boogeymanning an obvious improvement in the ability to better yourself just because a lot of people don't choose the betterment route. I've never been mo…
This is like saying if you stop exercising just because you are driving everywhere then it is a you problem. On an individual level it may be useful advice, but on a societal level we see how it plays out — rising obesity rates and children shut in bedrooms with their screens. It turns out if you stop getting exercise from your daily routines, many people will just not get any exercise at all! Of course you can make…
The thing is out of the bottle, can't stop it. I am neither pro or against, but it's here. Ducking uppercuts and rope-a-dope-ing is defeatist. Software engineering has been romanticized, it's not glamorous anymore it's not Halt & Catch Fire days. There is nothing new anymore, just a quicker way to CRUD. The next is elsewhere else.
Everything is happening quicker and we see it in real time.
Re: How do we stop vibe coding?
#84>Writing code by hand will always be around for bespoke and novel, complex work. That sentence is probably the key. There is zero chance of this stopping overall. Much like with artists 90% of the commercial stuff - copy/ads with generic guy in suit picture - will be AI that is "good enough". Less concerned about the code quality and more the labour market dynamics. If this goes anything like translation & creative s…
Writing code by hand will always be around for bespoke and novel, complex work.
>That sentence is probably the key. >There is zero chance of this stopping overall.
End users don't care, nor they should. You do, but if you want to keep enjoying that part, it's art at that point. Many artists have day jobs.
Re: How do we stop vibe coding?
#85Howabout: just turn off AI. I scanned the article, never made it to the bottom, didn’t find the point the author was trying to make. Howabout just learning to code better as a human without using AI. Just like learning a craft. Just refuse to use AI. Not possible because of peer pressure? Well then stop worrying and continue to vibe. Either stop or stop complaining but don’t make excuses or write long articles that r…
Maybe try reading the article instead of scanning it.
Its neither ranting nor rambling, nor is it complaining or making excuses. It pokes holes in common patterns around agentic coding (e.g. SDD, TDD, etc) and identifies two interesting new approaches, one which they're building.
The piece took ten minutes to read. Surely focus isn't that hard to come by.
Re: How do we stop vibe coding?
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might not be so much of a peer pressure than “industry pressure” soon. You can keep hand-crafting it all you want as a hobby, but selling your crafts will be totally different matter
Industry consists of humans, humans can change this collectively. It's still peer pressure. If you don't resist, don't complain. You won't be able to sell your craft, correct. That means keep your day job. If your day job requires vibe coding, then that becomes your day job. If you don't like it, quit. Live on the street and by your moral beliefs. Or else, sell your soul. That's the stark choice that plenty of folks…
AIs aren’t magically writing good code. I still have to prompt the biggest model towards a coherent design. DRY code isn’t their strong suite. They don’t give a shit about maintainable human readable code.
RLVR training rewards for achieving some objective. Even if they achieve by writing 1000 lines when a 100 suffices.
There’s a ton of value in writing maintainable code for a complex production system.
AIs are great at POC YOLO coding.
Re: How do we stop vibe coding?
#87Howabout: just turn off AI. I scanned the article, never made it to the bottom, didn’t find the point the author was trying to make. Howabout just learning to code better as a human without using AI. Just like learning a craft. Just refuse to use AI. Not possible because of peer pressure? Well then stop worrying and continue to vibe. Either stop or stop complaining but don’t make excuses or write long articles that r…
This article wasn't written for folks who just want to "turn it off". If that's you, by all means do so.
New people coming into the field will likely not have the privilege of deciding how much/little to use AI, just like I didn't really get a choice about whether I wanted to use CI or wanted to SSH straight into prod to deploy. As the industry changes, you change with it if you like being a hire-able professional.
This article was written for the folks that are interested in using AI while shaving off some of the sharper corners.
It is unfortunately wasted on people who believe you can just stuff cats back into bags.
Re: How do we stop vibe coding?
#88Disagree with so many assertions put forth here. You don't _have_ to turn you brain off when coding with an LLM. It's not some intelligence dementor. If your brain turned off while you were vibe coding thats honestly just a you problem and I wish everyone would stop boogeymanning an obvious improvement in the ability to better yourself just because a lot of people don't choose the betterment route. I've never been mo…
The people struggling with this most are also the ones that never got to grips with human delegation either. At least in my circle it's the classic leads/seniors (that predate the scrum "everyone's the same" thing) that are managing to get the most real mileage out of this.
It's clear to me now that the lack of benchmarks for competence in this space means everyone thinks they're geniuses who don't need a better process, because apparently their workflow "works for them."
Not sure what to say to any of this, because it's not even really related to the article except to say the assumption is supposedly completely wrong. That doesn't make sense to me, because as soon as AWS or something important goes down everyone immediately blames vibe coding.
So which is it? Is process completely solved here ("just get gud"), or is coding with agents causing problems?
Re: How do we stop vibe coding?
#89[flagged]
Re: How do we stop vibe coding?
#90This piece is more thoughtful than the title initially led me to believe. However, I feel like it's sort of like advocating for us all being able to read/write binary (using a bit of an extreme to prove a point). While there might certainly be benefits to understanding less abstract layers, I don't think it's necessary or even necessarily helpful. That said, I don't think the answer is "turn your brain off completely…
I'm making the case that we should make tools for the higher abstraction, not a lower one. You said it yourself: why should we read/write binary? We don't, we shouldn't. It might be useful in some cases, but working with assembly is much easier. Intent is more natural to us than code, for the same reason assembly is more natural than binary.
I'd agree with you then! I don't think that case was clearly laid out (or at least I didn't understand your argument to be as such). I'd also say that humans are historically quite bad at communicating intent (even if it comes more naturally and is communicated in natural-language), so I think tools that support human agent interaction and iteration are important.