Comment by imcritic

I call bullshit on this article and most of its arguments. The article was written out of fear felt as programmers' gate keeping falls apart and programming becomes generally more available to the broader auditory.

A quote from the article:

> Programming is fundamentally theory building, not producing lines of code. We know this.

Well, then you should understand that the "vibe coder" is someone with the idea for the code and during the vibe code session they build the theory for the program. Coding is less important than the idea behind the code.

So what the resulting code is "one use" and "legacy" or whatever if it does the job? If the vibe coder has saved their prompts - it could be later reproduced, improved and extended just the same way!