4 ms·

> I would not consider myself a "vibecoder", or jaithon as "ai slop" > Additionally, around 80% of the raw code in this repository was produced with agentic co

by hallole 2mo ago

> I would not consider myself a "vibecoder", or jaithon as "ai slop" > Additionally, around 80% of the raw code in this repository was produced with agentic coding tools Not to be a party pooper, but even if the author wouldn't themselves describe it as "slop," the term still applies. It isn't really a "collaboration" if the vast majority of the implementation was carried out by one (non-human) party.

AbhiramaVS 2mo ago
AI Slop is more of a convention than an actual definition. There is no standard definition (from what I know) that is widly accepted for the definition of AI slop: some people might say any use of AI is slop or others might have a more liberal opinion (like me) where if AI is properly used and generates good results, it is not considered slop. In my personal opinion (you are 100% free to disagree as this is just an opinion and not fact) the 'hard' part of programing is coming up with the proper architecture, and ensuring the codebase is maintainable and is able to be built on top of. Additionally, the word slop in my opinion signals that the product is terrible. In my opinion, the product of Jaithon is not terrible (like some AI generated code is) and as I have not only been highly transparent with the use of AI and also used it with an appropriate maner with limits, by my definitions of it, this is not considered slop. Additionally, the vast majority of the CODE was carried out by AI, not the implementation. Architecture & language automota were actually created in 2022-2023 while I was in 8th grade. AI was only used rather recently to speedrun development. Hope this serves as further clarification by what my readme and my words ment.
andriy_koval 2mo ago
slop likely means low quality. If author reviewed and directed every line of code, there is a chance result is high quality.
- AbhiramaVS 2mo ago
  yup!
ModernMech 2mo ago
Individual authorship doesn't matter anymore, what matters is whether the user has control enough over the process to shape the output, and with recent AI agentic harnesses they do. > It isn't really a "collaboration" if the vast majority of the implementation was carried out by one (non-human) party. So then there is a ratio at which you would say it's a collaboration? What if I write the function signatures and allow the AI to fill in the implementations? What if I write half the implementation and the AI fills in the other half? What if I write comments and the AI fills in an implementation of the thing and then I review it and fix it manually, is that vibecoding or slopcoding? Are vibecoding and slopcoding the same? Moreover: does any of that even matter if the end result is functionally the same either way? I'm just trying to understand the acceptable way to use these tools because the opinions people have range from "not at all, never" to "all the time, always".
- AbhiramaVS 2mo ago
  imo you should use these tools to the extent that you still understand the code. i put this on my readme, but how I use these tools is I first draft the code for wtv Im doing manually (like a bug fix, new fewture etc) with a ton of comments so the LLM can understand what I ment to do, and then I just let it finish up the code with implementation, integration with rest of codebase, optimization if the code I wrote was terribly written and like also just to tell me if the bug fix is wrong etc. i think this is an appropriate use of AI but would love to hear other opinions
AbhiramaVS 2mo ago
Additionally (i have no idea if this is intentional or not), the order of my words in the readme seems to be flipped here. This line > Additionally, around 80% of the raw code in this repository was produced with agentic coding tools came prior to this line > I would not consider myself a "vibecoder", or jaithon as "ai slop" Phrasing it the other way like you just did makes it seem like I contradicted my self heavily, however in reality I had the second line with a bunch of reasoning in the readme.

by hallole 2mo ago

AbhiramaVS 2mo ago

AI Slop is more of a convention than an actual definition. There is no standard definition (from what I know) that is widly accepted for the definition of AI slop: some people might say any use of AI is slop or others might have a more liberal opinion (like me) where if AI is properly used and generates good results, it is not considered slop. In my personal opinion (you are 100% free to disagree as this is just an opinion and not fact) the 'hard' part of programing is coming up with the proper architecture, and ensuring the codebase is maintainable and is able to be built on top of. Additionally, the word slop in my opinion signals that the product is terrible. In my opinion, the product of Jaithon is not terrible (like some AI generated code is) and as I have not only been highly transparent with the use of AI and also used it with an appropriate maner with limits, by my definitions of it, this is not considered slop. Additionally, the vast majority of the CODE was carried out by AI, not the implementation. Architecture & language automota were actually created in 2022-2023 while I was in 8th grade. AI was only used rather recently to speedrun development. Hope this serves as further clarification by what my readme and my words ment.

andriy_koval 2mo ago

slop likely means low quality. If author reviewed and directed every line of code, there is a chance result is high quality.

AbhiramaVS 2mo ago
yup!

ModernMech 2mo ago

Individual authorship doesn't matter anymore, what matters is whether the user has control enough over the process to shape the output, and with recent AI agentic harnesses they do. > It isn't really a "collaboration" if the vast majority of the implementation was carried out by one (non-human) party. So then there is a ratio at which you would say it's a collaboration? What if I write the function signatures and allow the AI to fill in the implementations? What if I write half the implementation and the AI fills in the other half? What if I write comments and the AI fills in an implementation of the thing and then I review it and fix it manually, is that vibecoding or slopcoding? Are vibecoding and slopcoding the same? Moreover: does any of that even matter if the end result is functionally the same either way? I'm just trying to understand the acceptable way to use these tools because the opinions people have range from "not at all, never" to "all the time, always".

AbhiramaVS 2mo ago
imo you should use these tools to the extent that you still understand the code. i put this on my readme, but how I use these tools is I first draft the code for wtv Im doing manually (like a bug fix, new fewture etc) with a ton of comments so the LLM can understand what I ment to do, and then I just let it finish up the code with implementation, integration with rest of codebase, optimization if the code I wrote was terribly written and like also just to tell me if the bug fix is wrong etc. i think this is an appropriate use of AI but would love to hear other opinions

AbhiramaVS 2mo ago

Additionally (i have no idea if this is intentional or not), the order of my words in the readme seems to be flipped here. This line > Additionally, around 80% of the raw code in this repository was produced with agentic coding tools came prior to this line > I would not consider myself a "vibecoder", or jaithon as "ai slop" Phrasing it the other way like you just did makes it seem like I contradicted my self heavily, however in reality I had the second line with a bunch of reasoning in the readme.