The issue lies with knowing what the code does that AI produces, if you don’t have a clue and still use it that is when you are a vibe coder in my book.
If you just use it to increase productivity and improve code then I don’t see any issue with that and it does not make you any less of a developer. Times have changed, Stack Overflow is from the past.
If I slop out code, I still see it as a piece of crap. It doesn’t matter whether I understand it or proof-read it. If I ever do that, I stop being a programmer.
The thing is that it’s an extra slog because the auto written code ‘looks’ right much better than it is right. And reviewing that sort of code is exhausting because you have to be on your toes at all times.
Also, it suggests you have a comprehensive and suitable spec that describes everything, just in prose. At least in my experience, the spec is a token starting point with the design being fleshed out as you go in practice. Trying to make the spec comprehensive up front can be much more painful than guiding the implementation piece by piece.
It all depends on what the scope is, and how vague your specification can be and still drive results. For example, “take this existing running code and assets and make it run exactly the same way it should today, but on a different runtime” is roughly a scenario that LLM can be pretty free with and is more likely to get closer to what you want than a new sort of thing.
I’m surprised at the negative response to my comment, the statistics do not lie about Stack Overflow usage dropping rapidly. AI clearly objectively helps people. It is not all slop, I think people think about AI emotionally and see everything it touches as bad.
If you’re surprised, you’re living in a bubble. AI doesn’t help people; it’s a crutch that you pay for, both monetarily and environmentally, and it robs a younger generation of knowledge and learning. It’s run and managed by the worst people on this planet who want to get you hooked so they can farm you for money and data.
Take this kid: how is AI helping him here? He’s 14 and paying money to steal data. At the end of all this, he’ll get bragging rights and maybe a big lawsuit that will probably ruin the rest of his life. And he still won’t know how to write code.
So, while AI might be helpful to those who are more experienced, it completely deprives everyone else of the opportunity to learn, grow and integrate with society. AI is our Easter Island.
The issue lies with knowing what the code does that AI produces, if you don’t have a clue and still use it that is when you are a vibe coder in my book.
If you just use it to increase productivity and improve code then I don’t see any issue with that and it does not make you any less of a developer. Times have changed, Stack Overflow is from the past.
I program longer than that kid lives.
If I slop out code, I still see it as a piece of crap. It doesn’t matter whether I understand it or proof-read it. If I ever do that, I stop being a programmer.
The code may be good, you are assuming all of it is bad.
You don’t see any advantage to having code auto written to spec and then being able to tweak the result? Just simply as a time saving/efficiency hack?
Honestly curious, not baiting here.
The thing is that it’s an extra slog because the auto written code ‘looks’ right much better than it is right. And reviewing that sort of code is exhausting because you have to be on your toes at all times.
Also, it suggests you have a comprehensive and suitable spec that describes everything, just in prose. At least in my experience, the spec is a token starting point with the design being fleshed out as you go in practice. Trying to make the spec comprehensive up front can be much more painful than guiding the implementation piece by piece.
It all depends on what the scope is, and how vague your specification can be and still drive results. For example, “take this existing running code and assets and make it run exactly the same way it should today, but on a different runtime” is roughly a scenario that LLM can be pretty free with and is more likely to get closer to what you want than a new sort of thing.
I’m surprised at the negative response to my comment, the statistics do not lie about Stack Overflow usage dropping rapidly. AI clearly objectively helps people. It is not all slop, I think people think about AI emotionally and see everything it touches as bad.
If you’re surprised, you’re living in a bubble. AI doesn’t help people; it’s a crutch that you pay for, both monetarily and environmentally, and it robs a younger generation of knowledge and learning. It’s run and managed by the worst people on this planet who want to get you hooked so they can farm you for money and data.
Take this kid: how is AI helping him here? He’s 14 and paying money to steal data. At the end of all this, he’ll get bragging rights and maybe a big lawsuit that will probably ruin the rest of his life. And he still won’t know how to write code.
So, while AI might be helpful to those who are more experienced, it completely deprives everyone else of the opportunity to learn, grow and integrate with society. AI is our Easter Island.