Unless specific issues have been identified that were introduced by it being "vibe coded", isn't a reaction to reject it outright without actually checking the ground truth just exhibiting the behavior you are criticizing?
Any software engineer that still rejects the concept of agentic coding is frankly NGMI. If you still see AI this way, you simply never bothered to update your priors, which is just not survivable in this career. I do hope you're already independently wealthy.
> I do hope you're already independently wealthy.
Nah, I'm good. I'll be selling llama.cpp slop to people like you when I retire.
And what are you referring to as "behavior"?
BUT.
"Ignore anything but actual problems" is a terrible stance to take generally for software and dependency selection. Incidents are fairly sparse, process is much easier to observe. So if you can find connections between process and incident possibility, that's a very reasonable heuristic. And it's easy to find examples of overaggressive LLM usage introducing problems into software.
The vast majority of new software is written using AI. The problem is not that it is written by AI, but rather than some people treat it like a black box. It is entirely possible to use AI to write code and verify that it is correct. Even Linus Torvalds is allowing AI generated code into the Linux kernel as long as it's managed properly.
How on earth does this follow? It's common, so it should be accepted without scrutiny?
>The problem is not that it is written by AI, but rather than some people treat it like a black box.
Yes, and guns don't kill people. Obviously the issue has two facets. It would be irrational to say "AI is flawless" or "humans are flawless".
Allowing genAI code does not imply blindly trusting genAI code.
>as long as it's managed properly.
Correct. Hence the issue. This was vibe-coding by even the strictest definitions of the term. Vibe-coding is, by definition, not "properly managed".
As far as testing - yes, they do have a test suite that it was checked against during the rewrite, but that still means that any behaviour that wasn't strictly tested for by that suite could have changed and it would still pass.
Not even 10 percent is. Good lord. Go outside and touch grass.