I thought "vibe coding" had come to mean "I used an LLM to generate this code", but didn't really imply we'd given up trying to review and read the output. The author is taking it one-step further by suggesting we not bother with the latter.

▲

vunderba 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's true that the meaning of "vibe coding" has been somewhat diluted - but the original definition as set forth by Karpathy was to forget that the code even exists (no review, no reading the commits, nothing).

https://xcancel.com/karpathy/status/1886192184808149383?lang...

▲

FartyMcFarter 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A lot of people doing vibe coding can barely (or not at all) understand how to read code.

	▲	oxfeed65261 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Sure, but the article is talking about people who can and do read code now but will develop software without reading code in the future. Kind of like you rarely look at the object code that the compiler produces.

▲

medstrom 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I, too, appreciate the clarification in the term "write-only code".