> I fear for the variety in the internet coding culture. Significant portion of code is being written by ai, all looks the same, all has the same mediocre quality.

Who cares who actually "typed" it? Shit code will be shit code regardless of author, there is just more of it now compared to before, just like there was more 10 years ago compared to 20 years, as the barriers for getting started is lowered time and time again. Hopefully, it'll be a net-positive, just like previous times, it's never been easier to write code to solve your own specific personal problems.

Developers who have strict requirements on the code they "produce" will make the LLM fit with their requirements when needed, and "sloppy" developers will continue to publish spaghetti code, regardless of LLMs existence.

I don't get the whole "vibe-coding" thing because clearly most of the code LLMs produce is really horrible, but with good prompting, strict reviews and not accepting bad changes just to move forward lets you mold the code into something acceptable.

(I have not looked at this specific project's code, so not sure this applies to this project, but is more of a general view obviously)

I think the issue is, you used to be able to tell at a glance how much effort someone put into a project (among other things) and that would give you a reasonable approximation of what to expect from the project itself.

But now the signals are much harder to read. People post polished looking libraries / tools with boastful convincing claims about what they can do for you, yet they didn't even bother to check if they work at all, just wasting everyone's time.

It's a weird new world.