Comment by OJFord
4 months ago
So the issue you're taking with 'thing is crap' is not 'thing is not crap', but 'you have redefined thing to be reviewed and held to standards and then called it crap'? And so, what, if we just accept it as it is, it's not crap? Or it is, but it everyone knows it (do they?) so it's not worth calling crap?
Well, let's be clear: the original definition was actually the one that Simon describes here, and there's no ambiguity around that fact since it came from one specific tweet where Andrej Karpathy laid out a definition for the term quite directly:
"There's a new kind of coding I call "vibe coding", where you fully give in to the vibes, embrace exponentials, and forget that the code even exists. ... I "Accept All" always, I don't read the diffs anymore. When I get error messages I just copy paste them in with no comment, usually that fixes it. The code grows beyond my usual comprehension ... Sometimes the LLMs can't fix a bug so I just work around it or ask for random changes until it goes away. It's not too bad for throwaway weekend projects, but still quite amusing. ..."
So yes, "not reading the code" is baked in quite specifically.