On the flip side, if you’re vibe coding an app you should seriously consider whether it’s something you want to open source or make available publicly. There’s a social contract that comes with that.

This is the attitude of an existing programmer who is using these tools. What I’ve found on here is a specific pattern that keeps repeating:

1. A post is sharing/advertising a project. The poster is two hours old.
2. The poster is extremely coy about how their project was made despite obvious slop in the post body. They’re a bit clueless about anything that looks like a social contract that comes with that and think there’s something strange or accusatory/interrogatory when people ask questions they think are too difficult or technical
3. Some Lemmy users have generally polite but fundamental critiques and questions the poster can’t answer or thinks must be gotchas
4. The poster has a crash out about us all being mean/unappeasable/anti-AI/luddites/Linux users/godless commies and is usually the only one downvoting comments, even ones that read like genuinely interested, though cautious
5. The post and account are deleted

There’s a clear disconnect. You’re talking about the homelab community which is a bit different but I specifically remember someone making an accessible Android UI and being extremely frustrated at people asking for the entire code to be released, and at people saying there’s not enough features there for that poster to be looping in advertisements on a fucking home page UI.

I get the impression that primarily-slop coders on some level think they’re doing programming, because of how you can get functional prototypes of code that is way above what a total beginner can write on their own. They think having code that compiles (whatever it’s usually Python there’s no compiling) means the hard part is over. They don’t seem to understand that the questions and concerns about vibe coding aren’t moral complaints but genuine concerns about liability, running code even the author doesn’t understand, and a complete cluelessness about what they should be doing to evaluate the code besides prompting it to be “good with no mistakes”.

That Android UI project seemed like a little thing a few people could install on their grandparents’ phones. It’s normal for the author not to understand every little thing. But being totally clueless and being offended at the suggestion, being entitled to put ads in it to get 0.0016 USD per year per grandma in exchange for taking up a quarter of her screen forever, not understanding why this looks scummy, why refusing to release 60% of the code looks scummy, why half the questions are being asked at all.

Again this would not be a problem if this wasn’t now expected for a significant portion of any projects you find online. A lot of projects are the first genuine effort of someone out there and they’re not perfect but they didn’t feel like the unceremonious implosion of the entire philosophical concept of personal computing.

And I’m fucking shit at writing good code and I’m pissed.

Low volume high end cars usually had a lot of overengineered solutions to problems that are now easily solved in modern budget cars by software and new materials/manufacturing. They could come up with a complicated battery system that gives them more design flexibility if they wanted to. They fucking should frankly.

The one in the pictures had a fuel bladder system IIRC. Not as exotic as figuring out asymmetrical distribution of multiple different sized battery boxes, but they did weird stuff to make their cars all the time. That’s the point of exotic cars that look stupidly different from other cars.

Cars are a weird one because they are a big part of the system of why the world sucks and luxury cars are just absurdly expensive status symbols. But fancy cars used to mean cool engineering! I’m even all for keeping most cars running on gasoline so long as there’s 90% fewer cars on the road. Usually online you can’t hate cars (the economic-social phenomenon ) and love cars (cool torque machine living room) at the same time. And I hate that

It’s definitely not possible to create something that looks exactly like that with modern safety design standards but they are being very stupid by not at least trying to evoke that more in their cars.

Then again, as far as I understand it, rich people are completely detached from my idea of good taste. So we might like the classic designs and the companies might know their customers prefer novelty or “the next big thing” over that kind of continuity