This might get me banned here but I mostly agree with him
I have seen a turn in the tide in the past few months. Whereas online forums discussing LLM tools for coding used to be near 100% brigade against them with mostly bluff and bluster and no real basis for the arguments, attitudes have been softening. I actually read one rather long thread with 90%+ support for the tools - not blind enthusiasm with no evidence, but clear statements from users about what is working well for them and what still needs improvement. All in all, work with the new tools seems to be going better “in the trenches” than work without used to.
In the end, it doesn’t matter if you wrote the code, an LLM wrote the code, your cat tapped it out, or aliens communicated it by blinking their home sun… you check it, it works to your satisfaction, you submit it for review and merge for use by others. In all those scenarios, it’s “your code” - the LLM, your cat, aliens, none of them are going to stand up and defend the quality of the product. If you don’t really understand why what your cat wrote works, you probably shouldn’t sumbit it. Especially the alien code should be carefully examined before running, but at the end analysis it’s the code that matters, not its provenance.
2024 I’d use “the tools” to generate snippets that I would copy-paste and massage into my larger projects. Those snippets tended to be 2 to 6 lines long, and they’d be usefully correct about 80% of the time. I laughed at people who were “vibe coding” with those tools, even in early 2025. Like Linux in 1994, I’d call it “interesting, not ready for prime-time.”
By mid 2025, I saw the potential for improvement - but the better the code output got, the louder and more irrational the online reactions against it got - up until the past month or so it was like a guaranteed brigade of negativity.
I have seen a turn in the tide in the past few months. Whereas online forums discussing LLM tools for coding used to be near 100% brigade against them with mostly bluff and bluster and no real basis for the arguments, attitudes have been softening. I actually read one rather long thread with 90%+ support for the tools - not blind enthusiasm with no evidence, but clear statements from users about what is working well for them and what still needs improvement. All in all, work with the new tools seems to be going better “in the trenches” than work without used to.
In the end, it doesn’t matter if you wrote the code, an LLM wrote the code, your cat tapped it out, or aliens communicated it by blinking their home sun… you check it, it works to your satisfaction, you submit it for review and merge for use by others. In all those scenarios, it’s “your code” - the LLM, your cat, aliens, none of them are going to stand up and defend the quality of the product. If you don’t really understand why what your cat wrote works, you probably shouldn’t sumbit it. Especially the alien code should be carefully examined before running, but at the end analysis it’s the code that matters, not its provenance.
Generated code was trully bad. These days? Not so much anymore…
Better tools, more acceptance.
2024 I’d use “the tools” to generate snippets that I would copy-paste and massage into my larger projects. Those snippets tended to be 2 to 6 lines long, and they’d be usefully correct about 80% of the time. I laughed at people who were “vibe coding” with those tools, even in early 2025. Like Linux in 1994, I’d call it “interesting, not ready for prime-time.”
By mid 2025, I saw the potential for improvement - but the better the code output got, the louder and more irrational the online reactions against it got - up until the past month or so it was like a guaranteed brigade of negativity.