3 ms·

To make sure I understand your position: > But there are plenty of instances where I work with code that has a bus factor of 0. Do you think this is a problem

To make sure I understand your position: > But there are plenty of instances where I work with code that has a bus factor of 0. Do you think this is a problem? As per my other replies, if all of these instances are in completely unimportant projects, then I could see you answering "no" (but I'd be concerned if you're spending a lot of time on unimportant things). If they are important, isn't the fact that knowledge about them has been lost indicative of a flaw in how your team/company operates?

johnfn 1y ago
I do think this is a problem. But the article goes one step further than claiming it's a problem - it claims that a bus factor of 0, and by extension, vibe coding, is "fundamentally flawed". I don't think that a bus factor of 0 is indicative of a "fundamental flaw".
- matt_kantor 1y ago
  I think they meant: 1. If a process necessarily results in bus factors of zero, that process is flawed. 2. The nature of vibe coding is such that it always produces code with a bus factor of zero (i.e. this is a "fundamental" fact of vibe coding). I definitely agree with the first point, and I think agree with the second as well (at least if "vibe coding" carries its original implication that you don't even look at/care about the code produced by the LLM). Did you have a different interpretation? Or do you disagree with one of these points?
  - johnfn 1y ago
    Thanks for breaking that down. I think I would disagree a bit with both. It doesn't seem a priori evident that producing a bus factor of zero is bad. For instance, using a library which is not maintained has a bus factor of zero. That doesn't seem "flawed" to me. I think the problem I find with the author's, and your, statements is absolutism. Few things in engineering are ever truly 100% right or 100% wrong choices. Using a library with no maintainers is decision with tradeoffs, but in some contexts those tradeoffs would be worth it. Similarly, vibe coding code that has a bus factor of zero is also a decision with tradeoffs, and sometimes tradeoffs are worth it. As for the second point - is it really so. hard to read the code that an LLM produces? I am continuously reading output from LLMs for any code which is even remotely important. Again, this is another decision with tradeoffs. Sometimes I vibe-code a 500 loc script, but I can manually verify the output of the script, and therefore there is no reason to read every line. Sometimes I am working on more important code that must be right; I typically inspect it line by line, like a code review.

johnfn 1y ago

I do think this is a problem. But the article goes one step further than claiming it's a problem - it claims that a bus factor of 0, and by extension, vibe coding, is "fundamentally flawed". I don't think that a bus factor of 0 is indicative of a "fundamental flaw".

matt_kantor 1y ago
I think they meant: 1. If a process necessarily results in bus factors of zero, that process is flawed. 2. The nature of vibe coding is such that it always produces code with a bus factor of zero (i.e. this is a "fundamental" fact of vibe coding). I definitely agree with the first point, and I think agree with the second as well (at least if "vibe coding" carries its original implication that you don't even look at/care about the code produced by the LLM). Did you have a different interpretation? Or do you disagree with one of these points?
- johnfn 1y ago
  Thanks for breaking that down. I think I would disagree a bit with both. It doesn't seem a priori evident that producing a bus factor of zero is bad. For instance, using a library which is not maintained has a bus factor of zero. That doesn't seem "flawed" to me. I think the problem I find with the author's, and your, statements is absolutism. Few things in engineering are ever truly 100% right or 100% wrong choices. Using a library with no maintainers is decision with tradeoffs, but in some contexts those tradeoffs would be worth it. Similarly, vibe coding code that has a bus factor of zero is also a decision with tradeoffs, and sometimes tradeoffs are worth it. As for the second point - is it really so. hard to read the code that an LLM produces? I am continuously reading output from LLMs for any code which is even remotely important. Again, this is another decision with tradeoffs. Sometimes I vibe-code a 500 loc script, but I can manually verify the output of the script, and therefore there is no reason to read every line. Sometimes I am working on more important code that must be right; I typically inspect it line by line, like a code review.