3 ms·

"Vibe" is just an euphemism for lazy here. And that's not 'coding' in any shape or form, it's code generation through an AI model, without even understanding it

by talles 2y ago

"Vibe" is just an euphemism for lazy here. And that's not 'coding' in any shape or form, it's code generation through an AI model, without even understanding it, very different thing. It's like comparing cheap ramen to fine Italian cuisine.

ericrallen 2y ago
> ...it's code generation through an AI model, without even understanding it... Are you implying that Andrej Karpathy[0] doesn’t understand how the code generation from these models works? Or are you saying he isn’t capable of understanding the output? [0]: https://karpathy.ai/ https://karpathy.ai/
- sublinear 2y ago
  I don't think anyone is implying the author can't understand. The problem is with insisting that one doesn't have to.
  - lxgr 2y ago
    As I read it, they're making a case that one does not always have to understand all levels, and that's literally the story of human progress in a nutshell. People are still free to understand the joys of computer programming "by hand", if they are so inclined, just like some people still know how to build internal combustion engines. It might even be very fulfilling, lead to a great career as a car mechanic, engine designer etc. – but I think it's fair to also just want to be able to drive one and take a trip to somewhere amazing, and I don't think we need to morally gatekeep anything.
    - sublinear 2y ago
      It's less about morals and more about stability and quality. The "middle class" today usually understands their craft on a fairly deep level regardless of "progress" experienced by higher levels of socioeconomic status. Talk to those people of status and ask them if they think it's sustainable. Talk to any sufficiently experienced engineer and tell them they don't understand at "all levels". The worry comes when all of that is devalued to the point that nothing matters beyond merely determining what needs to be done and the real gatekeeping is done by idiots who think they're smarter than those who actually do heads down work. We're throwing away everything for these idiots who walk all over those who are scared of taking this situation into their own hands. Not everyone can be a hero, but damn do we need a few.
      - lxgr 2y ago
        > Talk to any sufficiently experienced engineer and tell them they don't understand at "all levels". I only need to look at myself for that. I'm pretty experienced in some areas, but the time that a single person can understand it all within a lifetime has long passed. > The worry comes when all of that is devalued Not everything will be devalued, but values will definitely change when it doesn't take a software engineer to write a simple CRUD application anymore. The industrial revolution seems like a good comparison: There are still people manufacturing individual, highly customized items, whether for niche applications or for people that value the craftsmanship in and of itself. But most things that used to be made in workshops are now produced in factories, with orders of magnitudes fewer workers. > We're throwing away everything for these idiots who walk all over those who are scared of taking this situation into their own hands. Another way of looking at this is that a lot of people (not all) have much to gain by letting go of some (not all) low-level control and focusing on higher layers. And yes, letting to of habits and control can be pretty scary – speaking from lots of first-hand experience.
- talles 2y ago
  Understanding the code that is being generated, not how the model works. That's his whole argument, just speak English and vibe with the thing, don't worry about the code. Stating the obvious: to understand the code you have to read it and interpret it.
lxgr 2y ago
Sticking with that analogy, it's like reprimanding somebody for cooking instant Mac and Cheese when they're hungry when there is a cooking class only a few minutes away, and implying that they must obviously not know or care about food at all.

by talles 2y ago

ericrallen 2y ago

> ...it's code generation through an AI model, without even understanding it... Are you implying that Andrej Karpathy[0] doesn’t understand how the code generation from these models works? Or are you saying he isn’t capable of understanding the output? [0]: https://karpathy.ai/ https://karpathy.ai/

sublinear 2y ago
I don't think anyone is implying the author can't understand. The problem is with insisting that one doesn't have to.
- lxgr 2y ago
  As I read it, they're making a case that one does not always have to understand all levels, and that's literally the story of human progress in a nutshell. People are still free to understand the joys of computer programming "by hand", if they are so inclined, just like some people still know how to build internal combustion engines. It might even be very fulfilling, lead to a great career as a car mechanic, engine designer etc. – but I think it's fair to also just want to be able to drive one and take a trip to somewhere amazing, and I don't think we need to morally gatekeep anything.
  - sublinear 2y ago
    It's less about morals and more about stability and quality. The "middle class" today usually understands their craft on a fairly deep level regardless of "progress" experienced by higher levels of socioeconomic status. Talk to those people of status and ask them if they think it's sustainable. Talk to any sufficiently experienced engineer and tell them they don't understand at "all levels". The worry comes when all of that is devalued to the point that nothing matters beyond merely determining what needs to be done and the real gatekeeping is done by idiots who think they're smarter than those who actually do heads down work. We're throwing away everything for these idiots who walk all over those who are scared of taking this situation into their own hands. Not everyone can be a hero, but damn do we need a few.
    - lxgr 2y ago
      > Talk to any sufficiently experienced engineer and tell them they don't understand at "all levels". I only need to look at myself for that. I'm pretty experienced in some areas, but the time that a single person can understand it all within a lifetime has long passed. > The worry comes when all of that is devalued Not everything will be devalued, but values will definitely change when it doesn't take a software engineer to write a simple CRUD application anymore. The industrial revolution seems like a good comparison: There are still people manufacturing individual, highly customized items, whether for niche applications or for people that value the craftsmanship in and of itself. But most things that used to be made in workshops are now produced in factories, with orders of magnitudes fewer workers. > We're throwing away everything for these idiots who walk all over those who are scared of taking this situation into their own hands. Another way of looking at this is that a lot of people (not all) have much to gain by letting go of some (not all) low-level control and focusing on higher layers. And yes, letting to of habits and control can be pretty scary – speaking from lots of first-hand experience.
talles 2y ago
Understanding the code that is being generated, not how the model works. That's his whole argument, just speak English and vibe with the thing, don't worry about the code. Stating the obvious: to understand the code you have to read it and interpret it.

lxgr 2y ago

Sticking with that analogy, it's like reprimanding somebody for cooking instant Mac and Cheese when they're hungry when there is a cooking class only a few minutes away, and implying that they must obviously not know or care about food at all.