this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
1133 points (98.5% liked)
Technology
75682 readers
3239 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How is it not correct if the code successfully does the very thing that was prompted?
F.ex. in my company we don’t have any real programmers but have built handful of useful tools (approx. 400-1600 LOC, mainly Python) to do some data analysis, regex stuff to cleanup some output files, index some files and analyze/check their contents for certain mistakes, dashboards to display certain data, etc.
Of course the apps may not have been perfect after the very first prompt, or even compiled, but after iterating an error or two, and explaining an edge case or two, they’ve started to perform flawlessly, saving tons of work hours per week. So how is this not useful? If the code creates results that are correct, doesn’t that make the app itself technically ”correct” too, albeit likely not nearly as optimized as equivalent human code would be.
To add on to what others have said, vibe coding is ushering in a new golden age for black hat hackers. If someone is rely entirely on AI to generate code they likely don't understand what the code they have is actually doing. This tends to lead to an app that works correctly for what the prompted specified but behaves badly the instant it has to handle anything outside of the prompt, like a malformed request or data outside the prompted parameters. As a result these apps tend to be easy to exploit by malicious actors, often in ways the original prompter never thought of.
I think this is what will kill vibe coding, but not before there's significant damage done. Junior developers will be let go and senior devs will be told they have to use these tools instead and to be twice as efficient. At some point enough major companies will have had data breaches through AI-generated code that they all go back to using people, but there will be tons of vulnerable code everywhere. And letting Cursor touch your codebase for a year, even with oversight, will make it really tricky to find all the places it subtly fucked up.
If the code doesn't compile, or is badly mangled, or uses the wrong APIs / imports or forgets something really important then it's broken. I can use AI to inform my opinion and sometimes makes use of what it outputs but critically I know how to program and I know how to spot good and bad code.
I can't speak for how you use it, but if you don't have any real programmers and you're iterating until something works then you could be producing junk and not know it. Maybe it doesn't matter in your case if its a bunch for throwaway scripts and helpers but if you have actual code in production where money, lives, reputation, safety or security are at risk then it absolutely does.
It's not bad for your use case but going beyond that without issues and actual developpers to fix the vibe code is not yet possible for llms