[simonw]

Right - there are two reasons I think we should define "vibe coding" as meaning LLM generated code we didn't review.

1. That's how the person who coined the term defined it.

2. I think "vibe coding" is a more useful term if we give it that definition.

When I say "I vibe coded that", I'm communicating a very useful piece of information: I'm saying that the code might work and might not, and if you ask me to explain what it does I won't be able to without further work. I'm saying it's prototype quality code that needs more investment before it can be used in production.

If we let "vibe coding" mean any code that an LLM generates it loses value as a differentiating term. If you tell me "I wrote this with the help of an LLM" I'll shrug my shoulders - if the code is reviewed and tested and indistinguishable from code you would have written without that LLM then I care about as much as if you told me used Sublime Text as opposed to VS Code.

What matters to me is communicating "this is unreviewed LLM-generated code that may or may not be production ready but I can't tell you one way or another". THAT is what "vibe coding" means to me.

I'm pretty sure I'm going to lose this one. Vibe coding is already being used to mean "an LLM wrote it" and - even though it's only just over a month old - I think it may be too late to save it.

I can try though!

[simonw]

I'm also very nervous that "vibe coding" will quickly become a term with a whole lot of negative connotations associated with it - there are already horror stories emerging of inexperienced developers who shipped full vibe coded SaaS products that turned out to be riddled with security holes.

It would be very disappointing if the team "vibe coding" became associated with bad, insecure code written by people who don't know what they are doing... and simultaneously become the term for any code written with the assistance of an LLM.