3 ms·

I didn't have the impression anyone felt ashamed of dating online back in the days and I don't have the impression vibe coders feel any shame today.

by k__ 11d ago

johntash 11d ago
I don't know if I would call myself a vibe coder, but I definitely feel shame about putting any llm-generated code online unless I've reviewed it to the point of it being what I would've have written on my own anyway. So lots of personal one-off tools/dashbooards that I never would have made before will probably live forever on my personal git server instead of github or somewhere.
bibimsz 11d ago
there was a mild stigma around "i met her on facebook". a negative spin would be like: it's like you're stalking random women, and you must not have much luck or courage to approach women. but facebook wasn't exactly a dating app, so.
drusepth 11d ago
I don't know about online dating, but I think the vibe coders I've interacted with the past few years break down into two distinct groups: 1. People who let agents drive designs/plans and just let them rip (what I would /actually/ call vibe coding) -- who place value in the final product, and aren't shameful about the tools used to get there as long as the product is "good" (and generally reroll entire apps from a single prompt until they get something that's actually good) 2. People who provide (or collaborate with AI on) designs/plans and use AI to write the code (which I wouldn't call vibe coding, but often gets conflated) -- who place value in the planning, and aren't shameful about the tools used to implement them as long as the architecture is "good" Either way: I'd say most people who "vibe code" (in either category) are a little annoyed at the term inherently belittling what they make, but generally dismiss the term rather than feel any shame about it. I'd be surprised to learn anyone in my programming network doesn't use any AI anywhere. It's a very powerful tool that's integrated pretty much everywhere into the 2026 Developer's toolkit, and the question is generally /where/ you use it (or not), not whether you use it at all.
- iohvvbhdyh 11d ago
  I think this is a very outdated perspective. I don't plan things. I braindump context to the agent let it implement something, and iterate from there (A LOT). Planning was for an era where implementation was expensive.
  - ModernMech 11d ago
    Implementation became cheaper but it’s still not cheap. I’m working on an implementation for a runtime that’s been going on for 4 months of 24/7 constant Sol and now Astra work. When things go wrong it costs my time, which is my most valuable commodity. A week spent going in the wrong direction is still a week. If I can avoid that by planning better I will.
  - happyopossum 9d ago
    > I think this is a very outdated perspective. Always amazing to see how quickly the norm can become 'very outdated'. What GP described was all unheard of in 2023, brand new in 2024, and became pretty widely accepted in 2025.
- jplusequalt 11d ago
  >term inherently belittling what they make I would argue that if you belong to group one you have not actually "made" anything. I would also argue that group two aren't "software engineers" anymore; what they do is less engineering and more architecture. Perhaps "agentic developer" is more appropriate.
  - drusepth 11d ago
    > I would argue that if you belong to group one you have not actually "made" anything. That's exactly the sentiment I'm referring to. I'm excited that group one is full of people who couldn't previously "make" anything with code, but now can (in the same way I'm excited that more people can now "make" music, art, stories, movies, etc). And they're definitely making stuff (friends with kids are making games that their friends play, sharing homemade videos with each other, making bedtime stories, making websites and apps that others use, etc). I'd also argue that theory and architecture have always been closer to "software engineering" than coding ever was, but I also acknowledge I've got a bit of a bias belonging to group 2 (otherwise: been coding for ~25 years).
spudlyo 11d ago
Sharing anything that has even a whiff of being machine generated opens you up to huge amounts of scorn and derision. It happens in the comment section of nearly every post on this site. If that's not the community here using shame as a mechanism of control, I don't know what is. I hate reading slop as much as the next person, so I get it, but I don't try to deny it exists.
- brazukadev 9d ago
  > but I don't try to deny it exists. Aren't you exactly asking every person in the comment section of nearly every post on this site to deny it exists? Let them complain about AI slop.

I didn't have the impression anyone felt ashamed of dating online back in the days and I don't have the impression vibe coders feel any shame today.

by k__ 11d ago

I didn't have the impression anyone felt ashamed of dating online back in the days and I don't have the impression vibe coders feel any shame today.

johntash 11d ago

I don't know if I would call myself a vibe coder, but I definitely feel shame about putting any llm-generated code online unless I've reviewed it to the point of it being what I would've have written on my own anyway. So lots of personal one-off tools/dashbooards that I never would have made before will probably live forever on my personal git server instead of github or somewhere.

bibimsz 11d ago

there was a mild stigma around "i met her on facebook". a negative spin would be like: it's like you're stalking random women, and you must not have much luck or courage to approach women. but facebook wasn't exactly a dating app, so.

drusepth 11d ago

I don't know about online dating, but I think the vibe coders I've interacted with the past few years break down into two distinct groups: 1. People who let agents drive designs/plans and just let them rip (what I would /actually/ call vibe coding) -- who place value in the final product, and aren't shameful about the tools used to get there as long as the product is "good" (and generally reroll entire apps from a single prompt until they get something that's actually good) 2. People who provide (or collaborate with AI on) designs/plans and use AI to write the code (which I wouldn't call vibe coding, but often gets conflated) -- who place value in the planning, and aren't shameful about the tools used to implement them as long as the architecture is "good" Either way: I'd say most people who "vibe code" (in either category) are a little annoyed at the term inherently belittling what they make, but generally dismiss the term rather than feel any shame about it. I'd be surprised to learn anyone in my programming network doesn't use any AI anywhere. It's a very powerful tool that's integrated pretty much everywhere into the 2026 Developer's toolkit, and the question is generally /where/ you use it (or not), not whether you use it at all.

iohvvbhdyh 11d ago
I think this is a very outdated perspective. I don't plan things. I braindump context to the agent let it implement something, and iterate from there (A LOT). Planning was for an era where implementation was expensive.
- ModernMech 11d ago
  Implementation became cheaper but it’s still not cheap. I’m working on an implementation for a runtime that’s been going on for 4 months of 24/7 constant Sol and now Astra work. When things go wrong it costs my time, which is my most valuable commodity. A week spent going in the wrong direction is still a week. If I can avoid that by planning better I will.
- happyopossum 9d ago
  > I think this is a very outdated perspective. Always amazing to see how quickly the norm can become 'very outdated'. What GP described was all unheard of in 2023, brand new in 2024, and became pretty widely accepted in 2025.
jplusequalt 11d ago
>term inherently belittling what they make I would argue that if you belong to group one you have not actually "made" anything. I would also argue that group two aren't "software engineers" anymore; what they do is less engineering and more architecture. Perhaps "agentic developer" is more appropriate.
- drusepth 11d ago
  > I would argue that if you belong to group one you have not actually "made" anything. That's exactly the sentiment I'm referring to. I'm excited that group one is full of people who couldn't previously "make" anything with code, but now can (in the same way I'm excited that more people can now "make" music, art, stories, movies, etc). And they're definitely making stuff (friends with kids are making games that their friends play, sharing homemade videos with each other, making bedtime stories, making websites and apps that others use, etc). I'd also argue that theory and architecture have always been closer to "software engineering" than coding ever was, but I also acknowledge I've got a bit of a bias belonging to group 2 (otherwise: been coding for ~25 years).

spudlyo 11d ago

Sharing anything that has even a whiff of being machine generated opens you up to huge amounts of scorn and derision. It happens in the comment section of nearly every post on this site. If that's not the community here using shame as a mechanism of control, I don't know what is. I hate reading slop as much as the next person, so I get it, but I don't try to deny it exists.

brazukadev 9d ago
> but I don't try to deny it exists. Aren't you exactly asking every person in the comment section of nearly every post on this site to deny it exists? Let them complain about AI slop.