zlacker

[return to "Perverse incentives of vibe coding"]
1. andy99+E9[view] [source] 2025-05-14 20:37:47
>>laurex+(OP)
I wish more had been written about the first assertion that using an LLM to code is like gambling and you're always hoping that just one more prompt will get you what you want.

It really captures how little control one has over the process, while simultaneously having the illusion of control.

I don't really believe that code is being made verbose to make more profits. There's probably some element of model providers not prioritizing concise code, but if conciseness while maintaining "quality" was possible is would give one model a sufficient edge over others that I suspect providers would do it.

◧◩
2. theshr+k51[view] [source] 2025-05-15 06:51:51
>>andy99+E9
But just like gambling, there are ways to do it correctly.

Yes, there are the grandmas in a trance vibe-gambling by shoving a bucket of quarters in a slot machine.

But you also have people playing Blackjack and beating the averages by knowing how it's played, maybe having a "feel" for the deck (or counting cards...), and most importantly knowing when to fold and walk away.

Same with LLMs, you need to understand context sizes and prompts and you need to have a feel for when the model is just chasing its own tail or trying to force a "solution" just to please the user.

◧◩◪
3. matsem+yc1[view] [source] 2025-05-15 08:18:48
>>theshr+k51
While I get your point, this also kinda sounds like a gambling addict trying to explain how they're not an addict and how they're losing money the correct way, heh.
[go to top]