Definitely not, I remember some 4 years ago some random bug in a github-supported github-action and a comment in an issue saying: "I heard the team responsible for this action was laid off, don't expect a fix". This was shortly after the microsoft acquisition.

But the vibe coding BS probably made it 10 times worse.

▲

strictnein 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I remember some 4 years ago ... This was shortly after the microsoft acquisition.

The acquisition was 8 years ago.

▲

cjbgkagh 3 hours ago | parent [-]

They started with a hands off approach and then went hands on, I’m not sure but that ‘hands on’ timing is likely to happen shortly after the usual acquisition vesting period of 3 years when the old guard starts to leave.

	▲	DanielHB an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Yes you are correct, ~4 years ago was when they had a lot of layoffs at microsoft and github. Initially after the acquisition it was mostly fine, but after the layoffs it was a noticeable degradation in service quality and reliability.

▲

embedding-shape 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> But the vibe coding BS probably made it 10 times worse.

Yup, keep seeing this in various companies. Teams that were effective and did solid engineering now are more effective and does even better engineering. Teams that were effectively already just "boilerplate monkies" now produce a lot more code than before, but the quality is the same so effectively they're worse at contributing now than before, and take more shortcuts, not less.

From my point of view, agents are amplifiers, so if you usually build spaghetti projects, agents just help you do that faster, not avoid the spaghetti altogether. If you usually build well-designed stuff, they can help you put that together faster.