I agree that it's ultimately about the product.

But here's the problem. Five years ago, when someone on here said, "I wrote this non-trivial software", the implication was that a highly motivated and competent software engineer put a lot of effort into making sure that the project meets a reasonable standard of quality and will probably put some effort into maintaining the project.

Today, it does not necessarily imply that. We just don't know.

The architect knows what it is doing. And the workers are professionals with supervisors to check that the work is done properly.

Asking someone to build a house - and then saying I built it - is "very misleading" to put it nicely.

When you order a website on upwork - you didn't build it. You bought it.

That's a lot of ifs.

That has to be the worst analogy I have read in a while, and I’m HN that says something.

What an outrageously bad analogy. Everyone involved in that building put their professional reputations and licenses on the line. If that building collapses, the people involved will lose their livelihoods and be held criminally liable.

Meanwhile this vibe coded nonsense is provided “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. We don’t even know if he read it before committing and pushing.

No, it's more like the architect has a cousin who is like "I totally got this bro" and builds the building for them.

Every single commit is Claude. No human expert involved. Would you trust your company database to an 25 dollars vibe session? Would you live in a 5 dollars building? Is there any difference from hand tailored suit, constructed to your measurements, and a 5 dollars t-shirt? Some people don't want to live in a five dollars world.

I think you need to start with the following statement:

> We would like to acknowledge the open source people, who are the traditional custodians of this code. We pay our respects to the stack overflow elders, past, present, and future, who call this place, the code and libraries that $program sits upon, their work. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the search engine for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding

Then if you would kindly say that a Brazilian invented the airplane that would be good too. If you don’t do this you should be cancelled for your heinous crime.

>This is highly toxic, lead to no discussion

Why good faith is a requirement for commenting but not for submissions? I would argue the good faith assumption should be disproportionately more important for submissions given the 1 to many relationship. You're not lying, it indeed is toxic and rapidly spreading. I'm glad this is the case.

Most came here for the discussion and enlightenment to be bombarded by heavily biased, low effort marketing bullshit. Presenting something that has no value to anyone besides the builder is the opposite of good faith. This submissions bury and neglect useful discussion, difficult to claim they are harmless and just not useful.

Not everyone in the industry is vibe coding, that is simply not true. but that's not the point I want to make. You don't need to be defensive about your generative tools usage, it is ok to use whatever, nobody cares. Just be ready to maintain your position and defend your ideals. Nothing is more frustrating then giving honest attention to a problem, considering someone else perspective, to just then realize it was just words words words spewed by slop machine. Nobody would give a second thought if that was disclosed. You are responsible for your craft. The moment you delegate that responsibility into the thrash you belong. If the slop machine is so great, why in hell would I need you to ask it to help me? Nonsensical.

> Everybody in the industry is vibecoding right now

no ‘everybody’ is not. a lot of us are using zero LLMs and continuing to build (quality) software just fine

It's being downvoted because the commenter is asking for something that is already in the readme. Furthermore, it's ironic that the person raising such an issue is performing the same mistake as they are calling out - neglecting to read something they didn't write.

Eh, DB branching is mostly only necessary for testing - locally, in CI or quick rollbacks on a shared dev instance.

Or at least I cannot come up with a usecase for prod.

From that perspective, it feels like it'd be a perfect usecase to embrace the LLM guided development jank

If you don’t read code you execute someone is going to steal everything on your file system one day