Vibecoders Can't Build for Longevity

blinkbat

time will tell. you can set reasonable constraints and review the code. unless you are disqualifying that as vibecoding.

blinkbat

> If you keep vibe-adding features, and somehow keep getting customers to pay for this thing, what happens once the codebase becomes so complex that an LLM cannot fit it inside its “brain”? you realize this point is well, well beyond what a human can "fit" in their brain as well? you start making shorthands and assumptions about your systems once they get too large.

graphememes

I think the existing comments already cover it most, also, I would argue that we are seeing a new emerging group of coders come into the realm of programming and we are judging them at their worst and comparing them to our best. It is quite insane to me to expect someone who just started to fully build google.com and all of it's infra,security,etc.

ting0

If you want proof that there's a serious issue with vibe-coding over the long-term, all you need to do is be a Claude Code user and see how for every release they make they either create 5 new bugs, or re-introduce 5 they've already patched 15 times over the last year. The creators of Claude can't even vibe-code well. Claude Code is one of the sloppiest, least stable tools I've ever used. Anthropic has already proudly boasted about Claude Code is entirely vibe-coded and vibe-maintained. It's not a flex. It's a signal not to trust it.

owenpalmer

Wake up babe! New system prompt just dropped!

bravetraveler

$EMPLOYER has decided longevity matters so little that we no longer "do reliability"; ship it, boys.