“this looks vibe coded” doesn’t mean “we don’t like your project because it used ai”
it means “your project for fucking sure does not do what you think it does because you are not a skilled developer enough to understand the code that the AI generated for you”
to which the counterargument the slopper would throw is “I wrote tests for requirements and the tests are passing”
how would a slopper know the code generated fits the requirements vs strictly only passes test cases ?
I am Java developer, and I don’t understand how exactly JVM works, for example. I’m not sure, how much my app will consume memory and CPU resources. I don’t know when garbage collector will do their work. I even don’t know what JIT and AOT compilation. And this doesn’t prevent me from doing good, effective and useful things. May be they are not the best. Maybe writing them on C or assembler will be more optimized and effective. But anyway, I am OK with that and trying to accept vibe coding same way, as I accept myself and my job.
Difference is that vibe coding doesn’t create 20% more CPU usage or 30% more RAM usage because it doesn’t understand the underlying mechanics (or, it could but that is not the important part). LLMs will happily provide you with solutions that consists of plain text password storage, leaking personal information through open APIs, and business crushing vulnerabilities. A sharp developer should be able to catch that, but if you’re reviewing 5000+ line PRs daily that’s been spat out by LLMs it’ll be impossible to catch all failures. And for someone who doesn’t know all those nonfunctional requirements that a business absolutely must have it’ll become a nightmare for the receiver of the code.
So to be clear: For functional requirements LLMs are a bit better but still needs hand holding. For nonfunctional requirements they’re dog shit as that’s the part that more often than not has to explicitly be mentioned. And being able to identify nonfunctional requirements and when they’re not met is the difference between a junior dev and a 10+ year lead.
Slow app? Just add resources. Vulnerable app? Actual compliance and business risk.
This makes no sense. What in the world makes you think that the average junior dev before AI produced perfectly safe code? For both the junior and the AI, the solution is a senior looking over stuff, decent code review cycles, pair programming, maybe a spec and good documentation for especially heinous customer requirements.
I’d actually go so far as to say SOTA models are far more likely to notice these issues and do them right. Seriously, juniors are often lazy, undisciplined, and very scared of asking for help. I say that as someone that’s both been that guy, as well as taught a bunch of those guys.
If there’s an olive branch I can extend, it’s definitely that adding LLM to a disfunctional, badly managed team and/or process won’t improve it. It will just increase the rate of bugs and vulns produced ten fold.
This is a helpful clarification, thanks. Then my question to you is, should the viber cease and desist? Is this not a valid way for them to foment an interest in software/tool/website development? Surely if their code has deep issues, they’ll discover that eventually and maybe learn from it, right?
Like, someone could try to learn a language by only using an ai translator. It’s lazy and not as effective, but I wouldn’t discourage someone from pursuing the language on account of that.
Then the copers defending AI will find it hard to ignore that it can cause irreparable damage (deaths)
These kinda of stories will prop up more and more as more and more of the old guard is replaced by Charles “chatgpt: how do I feel today?” LLM cave brains
Surely if their code has deep issues, they’ll discover that eventually and maybe learn from it, right?
Maybe… but that’s definitely not a given, and if they’re not already an experienced developer it’s almost certainly something they’ll try to solve by prompting, “don’t make any mistakes” or similar.
“this looks vibe coded” doesn’t mean “we don’t like your project because it used ai”
it means “your project for fucking sure does not do what you think it does because you are not a skilled developer enough to understand the code that the AI generated for you”
to which the counterargument the slopper would throw is “I wrote tests for requirements and the tests are passing”
how would a slopper know the code generated fits the requirements vs strictly only passes test cases ?
I am Java developer, and I don’t understand how exactly JVM works, for example. I’m not sure, how much my app will consume memory and CPU resources. I don’t know when garbage collector will do their work. I even don’t know what JIT and AOT compilation. And this doesn’t prevent me from doing good, effective and useful things. May be they are not the best. Maybe writing them on C or assembler will be more optimized and effective. But anyway, I am OK with that and trying to accept vibe coding same way, as I accept myself and my job.
Difference is that vibe coding doesn’t create 20% more CPU usage or 30% more RAM usage because it doesn’t understand the underlying mechanics (or, it could but that is not the important part). LLMs will happily provide you with solutions that consists of plain text password storage, leaking personal information through open APIs, and business crushing vulnerabilities. A sharp developer should be able to catch that, but if you’re reviewing 5000+ line PRs daily that’s been spat out by LLMs it’ll be impossible to catch all failures. And for someone who doesn’t know all those nonfunctional requirements that a business absolutely must have it’ll become a nightmare for the receiver of the code.
So to be clear: For functional requirements LLMs are a bit better but still needs hand holding. For nonfunctional requirements they’re dog shit as that’s the part that more often than not has to explicitly be mentioned. And being able to identify nonfunctional requirements and when they’re not met is the difference between a junior dev and a 10+ year lead.
Slow app? Just add resources. Vulnerable app? Actual compliance and business risk.
This makes no sense. What in the world makes you think that the average junior dev before AI produced perfectly safe code? For both the junior and the AI, the solution is a senior looking over stuff, decent code review cycles, pair programming, maybe a spec and good documentation for especially heinous customer requirements.
I’d actually go so far as to say SOTA models are far more likely to notice these issues and do them right. Seriously, juniors are often lazy, undisciplined, and very scared of asking for help. I say that as someone that’s both been that guy, as well as taught a bunch of those guys.
If there’s an olive branch I can extend, it’s definitely that adding LLM to a disfunctional, badly managed team and/or process won’t improve it. It will just increase the rate of bugs and vulns produced ten fold.
This is a helpful clarification, thanks. Then my question to you is, should the viber cease and desist? Is this not a valid way for them to foment an interest in software/tool/website development? Surely if their code has deep issues, they’ll discover that eventually and maybe learn from it, right?
Like, someone could try to learn a language by only using an ai translator. It’s lazy and not as effective, but I wouldn’t discourage someone from pursuing the language on account of that.
Guess we’ll find out once you start hearing about critical systems having bugs that are hard to ignore
Like health systems incorrectly monitoring data or programmed systems in planes causing catastrophic bugs
A lot more of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_flight_V88
Then the copers defending AI will find it hard to ignore that it can cause irreparable damage (deaths)
These kinda of stories will prop up more and more as more and more of the old guard is replaced by Charles “chatgpt: how do I feel today?” LLM cave brains
Maybe… but that’s definitely not a given, and if they’re not already an experienced developer it’s almost certainly something they’ll try to solve by prompting, “don’t make any mistakes” or similar.