Comment by g3f32r
1 month ago
> You wouldn't trust an engineer a bridge that an engineer vibe-engineered would you?
If it was as easy to stress test/battery test/materials test/etc a bridge as it is to test code - then yes. I'd trust an engineer who vibe-engineered a bridge.
---
The problem with mapping digital problems into meat-space is that there is inherently a few orders of magnitude of cost automatically added to anything that happens in meat-space.
I can spin up an arbitrary number (10, 10k, 500k) docker instances, X with fuzzed inputs, Y with explicit edge cases, Z with tolerance testing, etc etc. And if that doesn't work - I can fix and push a button and it just happens again.
If a bridge engineer could do that with bridges - yes I'd expect them to be vibing just as hard as we are now.
Don't mechanical engineers do that with FEM simulations? Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZspM_TvPKQ
Absolutely. These days engineers use AI and simulation to design new types of engines, jet nozzles, etc. Treating it not like a tool is the mistake, and the assumption many make is that “other people must be making that mistake too”.
That's verification. An engineer still understands the bridge and the engineering decisions that they built.