Vibe Coding Is The Future

If you really need some, there are some links in another comment. Another one that was made me really wonder if I was missing the bus and makes 10x claims repeatedly is this YC podcast episode[1]. But again, I'm not trying to write a point by point counter of a specific article or video but a general narrative. If you want that for your article, Ludicity does a better job eviscerating your post than I ever could: link I'm trying to write a piece to comfort those that feel anxious about the wave of articles telling them they aren't good enough, that they are "standing still", as you say in your article. That they are crazy. Your article may not say the word 10x, but it makes something extremely clear: you believe some developers are sitting still and others are sipping rocket fuel. You believe AI skeptics are crazy. Thus, your article is extremely natural to cite when talking about the origin of this post. You can keep being mad at me for not providing a detailed target list, I said several times that that's not what the point of this is. You can keep refusing to actually elaborate on how you use AI day to day and solve its problems. That's fine. I don't care. I care a lot more to talk about the people who are actually engaging with me (such as your friend) and helping me to understand what they are doing. Right now, if you're going to keep not actually contributing to the conversation, you're just kinda being a salty guy with an almost unfathomable 408,000 karma going throu

He might not have but some industry insiders, for instance YC are releasing videos like this: "Vibe Coding Is The Future" ▶ this video

I think the bigger "AI hype vs. Reality" gap is about the productivity numbers people casually throw around, like "10x as productive" or even 100x. For example, here are YC partners quoting a company in a batch claiming "100x speedup" in coding performance compared to the previous month: ▶ this video You can tell this claim is false, because that level of productivity increase would be glaringly obvious to an outside observer; it wouldn't need to be self-reported. A YC summer batch is 84 days culminating in Demo Day. So a 100x speed improvement would be like a team spending less than 1 day of coding and ending up with something that's on par with Demo Day in terms of functionality. Maybe the design would be wrong, but that wrong design would be just as fully-featured as a Demo Day app. So if 100x were true, the partners in that video would be talking about how the new batch dynamic is "They get breakfast with a customer, learn something new, have an epiphany, and then later the same day they have their entire app rewritten based on what they learned, and that scratch-rewrite is already at a Demo Day level of functionality." The partners aren't talking about that dynamic because it's not happening. So clearly the self-reported 100x is inaccurate. Even 10x would result in partners saying "Whoa, in this batch people have a Demo Day-quality app in production by the end of week 1 instead of week 12." The partners have a huge sample size on how much teams get done in what time period, s

Link to the original source for the percentage, obviously embellished: ▶ this video Writes maybe, but how much time is spent on debugging the terrible code written for the last five percent? Connecting bits and bobs together is pretty critical towards a fully realised product, and as the interviewee in the video points out, "it's not very good at debugging", because of course it is not. Has anyone actually made an AI workflow that would allow it to debug and actually solve real business problems? The best I've seen was solving off-by-one bugs, pretty obvious ones at that.