4 ms·

"vibe coded" is NOT the bad thing you think it is. Going from paper to implementation from scratch in half an hour or so is great.

mjr00 7mo ago
> "vibe coded" is NOT the bad thing you think it is. It's not inherently bad in the same way that a first draft of a novel is not inherently bad. But if someone asked me to read their novel and it was a first draft that they themselves had clearly not bothered reading or editing, I'd tell them to fuck off.
- sumeno 7mo ago
  At least in the novel example the author had the decency to write what they're asking you to read. These are more like sending someone who didn't ask you a question a LMGTFY link they didn't ask for and expecting them to read all the results. Just a complete lack of awareness and respect for the maintainers
brokencode 7mo ago
That’s a starting spot, but how about some testing and benchmarks? Where’s the value added if the person just tells Claude to do it and then submits a PR? The maintainers may as well vibe code it themselves if that’s all the work the would-be contributor is going to put into it.
- yieldcrv 7mo ago
  if it works it works we live in a wholly unoptimized world because the available resources have been so high, while the benefits of optimizing have been so low. that has flipped now and there are tons of low hanging fruit to optimize. I agree that benchmarks would be great, but thats only relevant to this one topic, not the overall agentic coded pull request concept itself
  - jmalicki 7mo ago
    It's relevant in that it's an example that people are doing the easy part - the coding - and skipping the hard part - the benchmarking and proving it works and provides value. A PR without evidence it works and expectations for the benefits using the new feature would bring is kind of worthless.
  - sumeno 7mo ago
    > if it works it works If it works in one case that doesn't mean it works consistently or well in the general case I've made lots of things with Claude Code that just work... until I do things in a slightly different order and the whole thing explodes
  - pqtyw 7mo ago
    It might work, but what's the point is sharing it if anyone can do the same in those 30 minutes with minimal effort?
  - brokencode 7mo ago
    Who says it works if the “author” isn’t thoroughly testing and reviewing it? People who do this want the fun part of pretending they’re implementing a feature without actually putting in the hard work it takes to make something for real. They want the repo maintainers to do all the hard, boring parts while they have fun. As if maintainers of open source projects don’t have enough thankless work on their plates. Good luck with that!
sroussey 7mo ago
The authors of the project have CC as well, so doing this is just eating their time.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
simonw 7mo ago
Sure, but the problem is when you take that half hour of work and share it with other people without making clear how much effort has gone into it. Software is valuable if it has been tested and exercised properly by other people. I don't care if you vide coded it provided you then put the real work in to verify that it actually works correctly - and then include the proof that you've done that when you start widely sharing it with the world. Right now it's impossible to tell which of these projects implementing the paper are worth spending time with.
- kristjansson 7mo ago
  > without making clear how much effort has gone into it I'm increasingly convinced this is the critical context for sharing LLM outputs with other people. The robots can inflate any old thought into dozens of pages of docs, thousands of lines of MR. That might be great! But it completely severs the connection between the form of a work and the author's assessment/investment/attachment/belief in it. That's something one's audience might like to know!
- dalemhurley 7mo ago
  Is t the point of an MVP to be an MVP? The OP put together a POC and shared it, showing novel concepts used together. They are not some large R&D lab. The purist tests being asked for is in contradiction to the ShowHN guidelines.
  - th0ma5 7mo ago
    [dead]
  - simonw 7mo ago
    This post wasn't marked as a Show HN.
    - aegis_camera 7mo ago
      Tried, but wrong time to post, it got zero attention . :)
pqtyw 7mo ago
If there is nothing valuable it contributes, though? i.e. its not a novel paper then only value is the whatever you personally learn from it.
Aurornis 7mo ago
> Going from paper to implementation from scratch in half an hour or so is great. This repo isn’t showing that at all. Scroll to the bottom of the README and you’ll see the other project it was based on. It’s a translation of other people’s work. There have been dozens or perhaps hundreds of vibecoded TurboQuant examples posted around the usual forums in the past few days. This one doesn’t even include anything helpful like benchmarks or tests. It’s just some proof of concept code that doesn’t even work if you try to run it. My problem with this specific type of vibe coded project is that it’s initially presented as something more novel or polished in order to get more upvotes, karma, likes, or pad a resume. Then you read it and discover they just pointed Claude at some other projects and told it to produce something similar, then posted it as their own work.

mjr00 7mo ago

> "vibe coded" is NOT the bad thing you think it is. It's not inherently bad in the same way that a first draft of a novel is not inherently bad. But if someone asked me to read their novel and it was a first draft that they themselves had clearly not bothered reading or editing, I'd tell them to fuck off.

sumeno 7mo ago
At least in the novel example the author had the decency to write what they're asking you to read. These are more like sending someone who didn't ask you a question a LMGTFY link they didn't ask for and expecting them to read all the results. Just a complete lack of awareness and respect for the maintainers

brokencode 7mo ago

That’s a starting spot, but how about some testing and benchmarks? Where’s the value added if the person just tells Claude to do it and then submits a PR? The maintainers may as well vibe code it themselves if that’s all the work the would-be contributor is going to put into it.

yieldcrv 7mo ago
if it works it works we live in a wholly unoptimized world because the available resources have been so high, while the benefits of optimizing have been so low. that has flipped now and there are tons of low hanging fruit to optimize. I agree that benchmarks would be great, but thats only relevant to this one topic, not the overall agentic coded pull request concept itself
- jmalicki 7mo ago
  It's relevant in that it's an example that people are doing the easy part - the coding - and skipping the hard part - the benchmarking and proving it works and provides value. A PR without evidence it works and expectations for the benefits using the new feature would bring is kind of worthless.
- sumeno 7mo ago
  > if it works it works If it works in one case that doesn't mean it works consistently or well in the general case I've made lots of things with Claude Code that just work... until I do things in a slightly different order and the whole thing explodes
- pqtyw 7mo ago
  It might work, but what's the point is sharing it if anyone can do the same in those 30 minutes with minimal effort?
- brokencode 7mo ago
  Who says it works if the “author” isn’t thoroughly testing and reviewing it? People who do this want the fun part of pretending they’re implementing a feature without actually putting in the hard work it takes to make something for real. They want the repo maintainers to do all the hard, boring parts while they have fun. As if maintainers of open source projects don’t have enough thankless work on their plates. Good luck with that!

sroussey 7mo ago

The authors of the project have CC as well, so doing this is just eating their time.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

simonw 7mo ago

Sure, but the problem is when you take that half hour of work and share it with other people without making clear how much effort has gone into it. Software is valuable if it has been tested and exercised properly by other people. I don't care if you vide coded it provided you then put the real work in to verify that it actually works correctly - and then include the proof that you've done that when you start widely sharing it with the world. Right now it's impossible to tell which of these projects implementing the paper are worth spending time with.

kristjansson 7mo ago
> without making clear how much effort has gone into it I'm increasingly convinced this is the critical context for sharing LLM outputs with other people. The robots can inflate any old thought into dozens of pages of docs, thousands of lines of MR. That might be great! But it completely severs the connection between the form of a work and the author's assessment/investment/attachment/belief in it. That's something one's audience might like to know!
dalemhurley 7mo ago
Is t the point of an MVP to be an MVP? The OP put together a POC and shared it, showing novel concepts used together. They are not some large R&D lab. The purist tests being asked for is in contradiction to the ShowHN guidelines.
- th0ma5 7mo ago
  [dead]
- simonw 7mo ago
  This post wasn't marked as a Show HN.
  - aegis_camera 7mo ago
    Tried, but wrong time to post, it got zero attention . :)

pqtyw 7mo ago

If there is nothing valuable it contributes, though? i.e. its not a novel paper then only value is the whatever you personally learn from it.

Aurornis 7mo ago

> Going from paper to implementation from scratch in half an hour or so is great. This repo isn’t showing that at all. Scroll to the bottom of the README and you’ll see the other project it was based on. It’s a translation of other people’s work. There have been dozens or perhaps hundreds of vibecoded TurboQuant examples posted around the usual forums in the past few days. This one doesn’t even include anything helpful like benchmarks or tests. It’s just some proof of concept code that doesn’t even work if you try to run it. My problem with this specific type of vibe coded project is that it’s initially presented as something more novel or polished in order to get more upvotes, karma, likes, or pad a resume. Then you read it and discover they just pointed Claude at some other projects and told it to produce something similar, then posted it as their own work.