> It’s a bit of a catch-22 to say “anyone can code with AI” and then make such statements.

Also makes it very much not "vibe" coding. The term keeps expanding into "any coding activity with AI assistance" but the whole idea of "vibe" coding is that you don't actually understand the generated code, and likely don't know how to program at all, you're just prompting AI to do everything.

Once you step into reviewing & understanding, you're no longer vibe coding you're just...coding.

I've expressed this to others as much as is reasonable - but the phrase "vibe coding" shouldn't be used in any serious discourse about agentic tools. We can't control the lens under which a given person first heard the term, but that moment (combined with the mountains of memes they've consumed since) is going to color a lot of folk's personal definition of vibe coding. It's not realistic to expect everyone to have a shared definition of it, despite the inventor of the phrase immediately giving it definition.

You are, I think reviewing and understanding the code and the app are very important, but the moment you go in and code yourself you're not vibe coding anymore. I think you break vibe coding when you touch the code yourself and have to manually make edits not when understanding and making sure the llm did what you asked it.

The first self-announced vibe coder was a founder of OpenAI. So he had the knowledge.

He started to trust the code written by the models to a point where he didn't always read the code. This happens when you you have learned the exact limits of your models.

It's like a senior coder who knows the projects the interns can handle without close supervision, and those they can't.

I just call it vybrid coding :)