mastodon - Link to source

Every time I see a vibe coder say something along the lines of "if you haven't used these tools over the past five minutes, you don't know what they're capable of, because everything's different now!" I get a little bit perplexed.

You do know that we can see the output without using it ourself, right? Some of us are still reviewing pull requests and reading through code repositories, y’know?

in reply to Chapter One

mastodon - Link to source

Trantion

@chapter1 I took a pair programming class a couple of weeks ago, and one of the exercises was for two humans to pair with copilot, which I hadn't used before. It was striking how quickly it felt that actually reviewing the code was an unnecessary bottleneck and I was holding things up by spending a couple of minutes reviewing what had been generated in a couple of seconds. I felt like I couldn't justify making the other person wait unless there was an obvious mistake.
@Chapter One
in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

mastodon - Link to source

Dr. Bruce Simpson

This is precisely why I revived KScope for Qt6 after years of it languishing after the Qt4 port bit-rotted. The tool exists to aid human understanding. It is not relevant to any so-called "agentic development paradigm", nor is it intended to be. I continue to be more productive by rejecting LLM driven tools.

It is also 3-clause BSD licensed except for the forward port of KFileTreeView, which is LGPL2. There is no requirement for me to release source code which might be subject to IP theft via "training". A prototype Linux AppImage exists.

This entry was edited (4 days ago)
in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

mastodon - Link to source

Chris

What's honestly even worse is juniors using AI making such statements towards experienced devs and countering a:

"I have used it, but I get better results using it as a helper for mundane tasks"

with a simple

"Well, then you just don't know how to use it - my code is better letting it do the job!"

Congratulations; You just highlighted that you didn't learn anything and why people try to replace you with it.

in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Carsten Raddatz

@Baldur Bjarnason
On the bigger scale, the claude-reversed engineered AutoCAD and such crafty tools do not make me forego all security, attestation and certification guardrails around large scale construction projects.

If there's technical debt in there (sure there is, it's in human engineered software too, you know) someone will find it. Either it's you, early on, or the bridge comes down in chunks and injures many people who relied on it.

I get the excitement and enablement. But am I going blindly forward? No. :)

@Baldur Bjarnason
in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

mastodon - Link to source

Stefan Lindbohm

Now that we’re a bit into this hype cycle it’s also fun to see that the same people who said something along these lines a year ago are now saying the same thing but just with an updated timeline.

”You don’t get it, everything changed in March 2026, before that I would have agreed everything from LLM’s were shit.”

…said by the same person who praised the progress in November 2025 ”since February 2025” or something 🤷🏻‍♂️

@HaTetsu

@波鉄 (Hatetsu)
in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

glitchsoc - Link to source

Lett Osprey 🍉

This happened at work. AI Hyped Coworker: "They set the agenda for the workshop!"
Others: "... yes, isn't that normal?"
AI Hyped Coworker: "The workshop is 2 weeks from now!"
Others "...oki?"
AI Hyped Coworker: "This agenda is going to be completely outdated two weeks from now!!!"

I guess, based on the 5 minute rule, by the time a workshop is over, it will already be outdated, and yet if we don't attend, we will be "left behind".

Can't they just leave me behind.

Please...

in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

mastodon - Link to source

Chris Krycho

Aye. There have been meaningful changes, but the way I put it to people is: the November 2025/Opus 4.5 shift was from “the stuff they spit out doesn’t usually work” to “the stuff they spit out usually works… but it still isn’t *good*”.

It’s quite plausible to me that that change has *worsened* the quality of code coming across the line, because “works” is enough for some folks to say “ship it”. When it just didn’t work, you *had* to actually touch it, which may have helped… somewhat.

in reply to Chris Krycho

mastodon - Link to source

Chris Krycho

I would say (and in the past *did* say) that this was just a new version of the classic automation paradox, but the *classic* automation paradox involves higher performance than the baseline under normal circumstances. There are axes on which that is sometimes true here—adversarial review, e.g., surprisingly often does better than manual code review given existing code review practices (That’s its own topic of broken engineering practices, of course!) — but it’s not remotely all of them.
in reply to argv[-1]

mastodon - Link to source

argv[-1]

And, well, mastodon.sdf.org/@argv_minus_o… bots are shockingly negligent. Ask them a question about programming, and instead of giving you one straight answer, they give you a dozen wild guesses and expect *you* to figure out which of them—if any—is correct.

I used to be better off with pre-2024 search engines and Stack Overflow, but now both of those things are full of bot-generated spam!

These bots aren't helpful for programmers. These bots are an unmitigated disaster for programmers.

argv[-1] (@argv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.org)

@worik@mastodon.social You're nothing if not persistent. Very well. I looked over the logs. Looks like nothing to redact. Here they are: https://files.catbox.moe/wzzpci.
argv[-1] (Mastodon @ SDF)
in reply to argv[-1]

mastodon - Link to source

Brett Edmond Carlock

@argv_minus_one

In my support role, I get support requests "assisted by", and sometimes even fully "agentic" and they are an absolute nightmare to work on.

Issues that aren't real, applied "fixes" that break things, generated fake "sources" for the prior fix or comments.

The back and forth is like communicating while both parties are suffering a watershed stroke.

@argv[-1]
in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

mastodon - Link to source

Shar(yna)Tran/Shark(aeopteryx)

The slop boosters always leave out a crucial part of the phrase because we absolutely know what sloptools are capable of (slop), what they mean by "you don't know what they're capable of" is "you don't know [how smart they make me feel as I accomplish nothing while offloading the real work to other people who have to review my slop]!"
in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

mastodon - Link to source

Alda Vigdís

They are also so occupied with trying to sell courses and learning material to the others, who they think are simply misinformed about how great this new technology is.

And it's always business school graduates.

Believe me, I've tried this stuff and I spent more time refining prompts into the night than I ever would have spent checking that ticket off myself.

And mind you — it feels amazing and you get instant feedback but the results are overcooked for a lack of a better word.

in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

mastodon - Link to source

The Sleight Doctor 🃏🍉

Did you see the Reply Guy lecturing Eugen Rochko (!) for having opinions about vibe coding, despite not having used chatbots himself? Basically everyone made the same point: you don't have to have "experienced" using the tech to assess the quality of its outputs.

Indeed, the elevation of subjectivity in this context looks very much like a form of "AI" psychosis. Of course Eugen is more than qualified to tell if the code is "spaghetti" (as he put it). 🤷🏻‍♂️

in reply to Baldur Bjarnason

mastodon - Link to source

Elton Cora (Honorary)

The every-five-minutes argument coupled with the “embrace now or you’ll be left behind” sentiment obliterate each other in an explosion of pure bullshit for me every time I see them in the same airspace.

Like, if the tools are constantly changing, and there’s close to infinite incentive for the providers to make them as easy as possible to onboard onto (and develop a dependency upon), what possible motivation is there for one to _not_ put off adopting them? Explain with math, if you prefer.

⇧