User benefits are assets, code is a liability. Code is free to produce and hard to validate: technical debt can easily snowball. PRs are cheap, humans who understand them are not. Yet again, proof of work is the answer. GM

Replies (41)

> These prompters are no more than bus drivers... > Why people stop doing / creating things with their brain? i disagree with you @DarthCoin ₿⚡️ coding is the "mechanical" part of the job. the hard and interesting part is designing a product from the UI/UX down to software architecture. LLMs allow us to produce code at light speed so we can focus on design, that's where we focus our brain power now. great software engineers now create quality software at 100x or 1000x the speed. people with good UI/UX taste can now build great products without knowing how to write code. open source projects can now be tailored to a user's needs by asking an LLM to change it for you. call them "prompters" or whatever... we are seeing a Cambrian explosion of software development enabled by LLMs now. of course some (most?) of it is garbage but it's been like this since before LLMs. people that leverage these tools are literally unstoppable now, a one man army.
Cert is expired on that link, but yes, I completely agree. The hype on LLMs is making me start to feel insane. Yes, I ship slower, but I hope to massively outlast competitors whose designs are incoherent and which no one understands.
you can have best of both worlds. I don't vibe code myself, but I can integrate vibe code submitted by others and fix it up faster than I could write it all myself. i'm starting to view it as a bunch of background processes managed by other people that get something 80% there. the speedup i am seeing is taking the 80% code and doing 20% of work here and there instead of 100% of everything.
Yeah, I think there is good to be had. It's just very nuanced and difficult to manage without spinning out or producing only the appearance of value.
Completely agree with both of you. There's an absolute tsunami of move-fast-and-break things consequences headed our way and everybody is just "vibing" on the beach.
I always say to my teams: "I hate code and I want as little of it as possible." Which, I love to program, but code is a liability, as you say. Users pay for what they value and they don't value code.
No offense, but great software engineers will not agree with you that code is just mechanical. It has a mechanical component, but building great software is not the same as being a great ux designer plus mechanical code. Those are just the edges. There's much more in between that you are leaving out, and that's where great programmers live. This vibecoding craze is just the same delusion that JavaScript has been inflicting for a long time on steroids—deluding people playing with ui tinker toys and application frameworks into thinking they are engineers. Not saying that's you, but don't fall into that trap. The only way to become a great software engineer is to learn the machines, networks, data structures, algorithms, patterns and practices deeply while writing lots and lots of interesting programs. Your not going to get that vibing. Software engineering and architecture are an art that must be practiced to be learned
dangershony's avatar
dangershony 1 month ago
Code vibinig is not programming. That doesn't mean you won't utilize ai as an engineer when you code. To me vibing is giving full control to the ai on how to design and build a product. I don't use ai that way (right now, who knows how it will be in a few months with how fast things move right now). I agree that coding is an art in some ways, you acquire the skill of that art over many iterations of writing code.
Some thoughts here
Gzuuus's avatar Gzuuus
- How do you code these days? This is a common question these days. I've been evolving my way of coding since LLMs came into play, before the term vibe code was issued. I've been exploring the different paradigms and shiny new approaches that appear almost every week, but to be honest, it is not really for me how the industry and devs are leaning into these new tools and framing. Fully autonomous development is not for me. I use the tools, I test the tools, but I don't fully embrace the whole vibe coding propaganda campaign that big AI labs are shilling. I use LLMs to assist in my work, not to fully delegate it to them. By doing that, I can maintain a consistent mental model of the software I'm writing. I can make critical decisions on the architecture, security considerations, and everything related to crafting sustainable software. By using LLMs to assist during my work, I can delegate tedious tasks, assert spec compliance, iterate and polish parts of the code without introducing breaking changes, and make maintainability easier, while effectively being more efficient and performant in my work. I avoid embracing the fully autonomous paradigm because we are not there yet, and tbh I think we will never be. By observing the current trends in companies, we can see that a handful of them are firing people, not just devs or engineers, but also salespersons, technical assistance, etc. The result now days is very low to zero benefits and a perceptible degradation of their services, together with an horrifying generalized burst of CVEs, attacks, and instability. Humans with knowledge and expertise are very competent and they cannot be replaced without sacrificing quality, scrutiny, critical attitude, and the capacity to make aligned and informed decisions. Why am I writing this? I think we are at a tipping point, and since last year things have started to change drastically. I think it is really important to talk and reflect on these things. I conceive LLMs and these new tools as enhancements, but not as fully autonomous entities with the capacity to take critical decisions in long term scenarios. They are like the Iron Man suit or a Mecha suit, an exoskeleton. They provide you with new skills and empower you with new tools and capabilities, but good luck with letting your agent run free for hours, days, weeks... as the industry is claiming, this is just my Pov, but I think it can also be a bit misleading for new people who haven't ever coded before, as they are finding loads of frustration when maintaining or just after coming out of the first MVP. Don't get me wrong, I love to see people who haven't touched any line of code before developing apps that serve them and their community, discovering the power and freedom that comes with creating your own software. But I think the approach should be to keep using LLMs to assist you, to learn and accompany you, and to dialogue, instead of fully detached development. This is a great opportunity to learn new things. It has never been so easy to get answers to your coding questions and learn. If you reject seeing a line of code, you'll end up with a mess, and if you don't know how to deal with that mess, you'll get really frustrated. And yes, it's true that LLMs are going to get better and more capable, but so is the mess they create, as they are delegated to perform bigger and more critical tasks due to the assumed competency. The bigger the mess, and again, of course, these things can be mitigated with guardrails, evaluation loops, etc., but there are no real solutions, and there never will be perfect solutions. So just final words: Use the tools and don't let the tools use you. Take advantage of them; it has never been so easy to learn new things. There is no such thing as a free lunch, but all of this doesn't mean that you cannot embrace the fully vibe coding experience, especially with something like Shakespeare.dyi that already paves the way and reduces the 'free wheel' risk or 'hallucination' tendencies. But once you have a shiny new thing, good luck maintaining it
View quoted note →
Everyone has such nuanced perspectives on this it's great to hear. As a software developer myself almost exclusively vibe coding for the past 2 months, here are my thoughts. I was able to be productive with one hand. Since I had twins, I had an infant in my arms for 75% of the time since they were born, but was still able to create things while doing that. Llms are JV. They will not replace senior engineers, but they do take the place of a jr dev, the same way they take the place of a paralegal. Organizations still need to hire those rolls to train people up, but one man shops can get 80% of the way to the solution faster. We still live in a fiat world where time to market is important, so getting a quick and dirty project out the door is highly valuable to determine whether or not your idea has a market or if you're just building a tool for yourself. Building tools for yourself vs others is dramatically different way of coding. Once you e determined a project has value outside of your hands, you can spend time and money honing it. The chat based ui for llms is not going to enhance products. I'm building a tool called vibe check, where you have your typical kanban workflows. Having llms work off of cards or issues will yield much better results that stupid chats. Especially if I get to the point where I can have specialized agents for certain functions (a QA agent, a security minded agent, a ux designer, a test automation agent, etc) then you can have work more fully fleshed out, then have a human in the loop review it and request changes before having the coder (agent or human) go back and make changes. This is how agile development has worked in the industry. Like imagine a user story that when it gets to the done column has been fully QAd, is deemed secure, has good design, etc and there isn't coordination required between so many people, just one human coder? Enhancing a good programmer with a security/QA/devops/designer will allow teams to augment their skills until they have time or money to develop their team or org to hire people with those skills
Ai as an augmentation to your skills set is the best use. Having an ai to do what testers or "devops" people do, will dramatically increase productivity. Replacing Indians with AI will yield incredible ROI simple for the fact that you don't have to be on a different time schedule and deal with the cultural bullshit that they bring along.
I like this idea. I’ve seen someone running like 4 teams of AI, each team with 3-4 agents to achieve specific goals. Almost like how a company would be structured. I don’t know if that is really needed in that way, but I find it very interesting. Where you will have a QA team, planning team, front end team? Infra teams. Not exactly, but you know what I mean.
I "vibe" little web sites, scripts and apps I want. I use it as a code generator like a team of fast juniors who I can't trust. But it manifestly can't do the important parts of architecture and engineering that require creativity, judgement and taste. And it CANT be trusted with security. "AI" is just a database. That's not going to change as it gets better either.
Hi all. See VibeKanban.com - it's a Kanban style multi-agent orchestrator that sits atop Claude or Codex. I picked it up on Monday and am overjoyed. It's great.
I do, it still only gets about 80% of the way there and i end up rewriting it anyways. Its nice to get the problem started
💯 i suspect the efficacy varies greatly depending on the domain. egui rust and highly optimized dbs isnt exactly the typical training data 😆
This is really cool. I've used it for a couple hours today and it might just be the tool I've been needing. I'm not organized enough to be a project manager, and I have a very one-track mind, which makes running multiple branches of a project really hard for me. This helps me avoid forgetting what's going on and allows me to clean stuff up when I'm done. Awesome.
Glad you like it. I can't remember who referred me to it but I owe that person a case of beers.
The JV analogy is spot on. The bigger issue for organizations is that the IT fiefdoms we’ve all grown to know and despise are over and done with - and that means the most supporting those careers is collapsing. It’s a bit like the power Bitcoin gives to those relying on legacy authority. There will still be IT careers but the bar to add value is considerably higher and you might need to support a large enterprise to make it worthwhile over just using the tech to build out your own products.
Yes, I have always been an "automate myself out of a job" employee. Which at most orgs is highly valued besides the current one I have bc their internal politics and culture is so shitty. Like I'm a sr devops engineer, and that is a fake job ( full stack developer is fake too), especially in the age of ai. With AI, every engineer should become a manager of a team of machines doing all the things they're not skilled at. So instead of a team of devs supporting one product, you can have 1 dev supporting an entire product OR a single cross functional team of devs supporting multiple products. Most companies will fail this transition (rightly so) and go the way of the dodo, unless they are conscious and actively doing really&d and retrospectives.
should become a manager of a team of machines doing all the things they're not skilled at => should become a manager of a team of machines doing all the things they ARE skilled at
Yeah, both models probably need to be experimented with to see what is most effective. Mature companies probably benefit from your model, startups probably mine until they can get the right people. At least that is my guest.