Comment by CuriouslyC
1 day ago
Mostly a good writeup, but I think there's some serious shifting the goalposts of what "vibe coded" means in a disingenuous way towards the end:
'Yes, this does come across as a bit “vibe-coded”, despite what the README says, but so does a lot of code I see written by humans. LLM or not, we have to give a shit.'
If what most people do is "vibe coding" in general, the current definition of vibe coding is essentially meaningless. Instead, the author is making the distinction between "interim workable" and "stainless/battle tested" which is another dimension of code entirely. To describe that as vibe coding causes me to view the author's intent with suspicion.
I find ”vibe coding” to be one of the, if not the, concepts in this business to lose its meaning the fastest. Similar to how everything all of a sudden was ”cloud” now everything is ”vibe coded”, even though reading the original tweet really narrows it down thoroughly.
IMO it's pretty clear what vibe coding is: you don't look at the code, only the results. If you're making judgement on the code, it's not vibe coding.
Viral marketing campaign term losing its meaning makes sense.
How do you define vibe coding?
Isn’t vibe coding just C&P from AI instead of Stack Overflow?
I read it as: done by AI but not checked by humans.
Yep I see it like that as well, code with 0 or very close to 0 interactions from humans. Anyone who wants to change that meaning is not serious.