You write like that's a bad thing. What's with the negativity here..
The builders are quietly learning the tools, adopting new practices and building stuff. Everyone else is busy criticizing the tech for its shortcomings and imperfections.
It's not a criticism of AI, broadly, it's commentary on a feature designed to make engineers (and increasingly non-engineers) even lazier about one of the main points of leverage in making AI useful.
Because that's where the text the devs type still matters most.
Do I care significantly about this feature's existence, and find it an affront to humanity? No.
But, people who find themselves using auto-complete to make even their prompts for them will absolutely be disintermediated, so I think it wise to ensure people understand that by making funny jokes about it.
Anyone seriously using these tools knows that context engineering and detailed specific prompting is the way to be effective with agent coding.
Just take it to the extreme and youll see; what if you auto complete from a single word? A single character?
The system youre using is increasingly generating some random output instead of what you were either a) trying to do, or b) told to do.
Its funny because its like, “How can we make vibe coding even worse?”
“…I know, lets just generate random code from random prompts”
There have been multiple recent posts about how to direct agents using a combination of planning step, context summary/packing, etc to craft detailed prompts that agents can effectively action on large code bases.
…or yeah, just hit tab and go make a coffee. Yolo.
This could have been a killer feature about using a research step to enhance a user prompt and turn it into a super prompt; but it isnt.
I thought the "you're not a real programmer if you don't use AI" gatekeeping would take a little longer than this, but here we are. All from the most minor of jokes.