[brazzy]

I've just seen that change happen in the a pet project within less than 10 hours of work.

I tried vibe-coding something for my own use, your classic "scratch your own itch" project.

The first MVP was a one-shot success, really impressive.

But as the code grew with every added feature, progress soon slowed down. The AI claimed to have fixed a bug when it didn't. It switched chest several timea back and forth between using a library function and rolling its own implementation, each time claiming to have "simplified" the code and made it "more reliable". With every change, it claimed to have "improved" the code, even when it just added a bunch of shamelessly duplicated shit.

One effect I am sure AI will have is to massively excarbate the phenomenon of people who quickly produce a large amount of shitty, unmaintainable code that fulfills half the requirements, and then leave the mess behind for another greenfield project.

[AaronAPU]

We’re so unaccustomed to working with non-deterministic computer tech that rather than acknowledge they are hit-or-miss, everyone just picks one side and goes all-in on it.

Which sounds an awful lot like politics.

[skydhash]

> We’re so unaccustomed to working with non-deterministic computer tech

The whole history of computer history is about making computing deterministic, after we found out that having generative anything (Recursion, Context-Free grammar,...) is a double-edged sword. So for any known set of inputs, you want the output to be finite and non-zero, and all items having the correct properties.

[AaronAPU]

All of physics was like that until QM

[norm_namillu]

"non-deterministic" is a weird way to say "mangles data 1/3 to 1/2 the time"