5 ms·
A single tweet with lots of analogy, with no screenshot/screen recording/code examples whatsoever. These are just words. Are we just discussing programming base
by rs186 2y ago
A single tweet with lots of analogy, with no screenshot/screen recording/code examples whatsoever. These are just words. Are we just discussing programming based on vibe?
- delusional 2y agoIt's influencer culture. It's like when people watch those "software developer" youtubers and pretend it's educational. It's reality television for computer people.
- tylerrobinson 2y ago> reality television for computer people Complete with computer people kayfabe!
- mpalmer 2y agoReality television plus cooking show, exactly.
- macNchz 2y agoCooking shows are a perfect analogy for this stuff. For some reason I never connected the highly-edited-mass-appeal "watch someone do skilled work" videos on YouTube with Food Network style content until just now, but you're right they're totally scratching the same basic itch. They make people feel like they're learning something just by watching, while there is really no substitute for actually just doing the thing.
- mpalmer 2y agoNot to mention cooking show hosts often recommend or outright sell/endorse their tools.
- exikyut 2y agoAnd the sad/crazy thing is that AI assisted coding/refactoring does seem to stray substantially over the line of observation vs participation to the point that the experience is largely defined by "learning by watching" :/ Prompt engineering (to the extent that it results in the difference between applied LLM success vs failure) requires the human to truly grok what they're getting help on - the current top comment notes that the model applied more or less exactly the same diff they would have done, based on deep understanding of the exact codebase being modified - and also have some level of intuition about how LLMs work. Someone just treating the model and context like an obscure TV remote and pressing all the buttons to see what they do, will get a result, and it might seem interesting, but will it be ontologically correct? Good question!
- kleiba 2y agoWhat, someone cannot utter an opinion anymore?
- frankc 2y agoI think the interest has more to do with who is doing the tweeting, don't you think?
- rs186 2y agoReminder: "appeal to authority" is a classical logical fallacy. For me, I don't know this person, which means that all the words are completely meaningless. Which is exactly the point.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- tymscar 2y agoI agree with you that the tweet is basically useless but what they have done there is not an appeal to authority fallacy. They have only explained why it’s popular. Arguably your response is a genetic fallacy.
- frankc 2y agoI don't think it's really an appeal to authority. No one is saying it must be true because this guy says its true. However, when a very respected figure in software engineer culture like Steve Yegge gives an opinion, that is more noteworthy than when random joe schmo gives his opinion. The fact that you don't know who he is means it's not interesting to you. Clearly, it's noteworthy to others.
- baq 2y agoWhen Karpathy and Yegge speak, I listen. When they say approximately the same things, I listen carefully.
- JohnKemeny 2y agoException: Be very careful not to confuse "deferring to an authority on the issue" with the appeal to authority fallacy. Remember, a fallacy is an error in reasoning. Dismissing the council of legitimate experts and authorities turns good skepticism into denialism. The appeal to authority is a fallacy in argumentation, but deferring to an authority is a reliable heuristic that we all use virtually every day on issues of relatively little importance. There is always a chance that any authority can be wrong, that’s why the critical thinker accepts facts provisionally. It is not at all unreasonable (or an error in reasoning) to accept information as provisionally true by credible authorities. Of course, the reasonableness is moderated by the claim being made (i.e., how extraordinary, how important) and the authority (how credible, how relevant to the claim). Quotation from https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-to-Authority https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-...
- mhh__ 2y ago> vibe People do literally call it vibe coding. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibe_coding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibe_coding (it turns out there is a wikipedia page already although suspect it'll be gone soon)
- rglover 2y agoThis is quite possibly one of the most disturbing things I've seen in awhile. Sure, for fun and one-off private apps this is fine, but the second that some buzzed-on-the-sides haircut guy thinks this is the way, the chaos will rival a Hollywood disaster movie.
- leptons 2y ago>"The practice defies the belief in the software industry that software engineering demands great skill." But actual software engineering does demand great skill. What "vibe coders" are doing isn't engineering. It's not even programming. It's like calling yourself a chef when you microwaved a frozen meal.
- baq 2y agoNot even programming? That’s even better! Great engineers know that code is 10-20% of the whole solution to a problem and it doesn’t matter too much. Code is not an asset, it’s a liability.