3 ms·
Sorry to be blunt, but if you created this site by asking a model to do everything, what should we be impressed by? The definition given for "vibe coding" is o
by mpalmer 2y ago
Sorry to be blunt, but if you created this site by asking a model to do everything, what should we be impressed by?
The definition given for "vibe coding" is obviously generated, and very much at odds with Karpathy's own description, which includes bits like:
"The code grows beyond my usual comprehension, I'd have to really read through it for a while."
"Sometimes the LLMs can't fix a bug so I just work around it or ask for random changes until it goes away. It's not too bad for throwaway weekend projects, but still quite amusing."
"...it's not really coding - I just see stuff, say stuff, run stuff, and copy paste stuff, and it mostly works."
Doesn't sound so much like a seamless fusion.
Anyone actually interested in growing as a developer should run screaming from anyone who promises that you can level up by substituting actual expertise for a model that will gladly give you bug-riddled code you don't understand and can't fix on your own.
- 000ooo000 2y ago>Sorry to be blunt, but if you created this site by asking a model to do everything, what should we be impressed by? I know someone, a systems engineer, who has been enjoying creating some software and scripts using ChatGPT. It's great that they're empowered in this way, but I could not be less interested in the code that they share with me multiple times a week. It's like showing a Temu 90c watch to a watchmaker. One could certainly argue that the tech behind LLMs is interesting, but I just cannot find anything interesting about the code produced. Yet users of LLMs really do love showing off whatever it spits out.