I tend to agree with your overall point, but I think you reveal far more about yourself than you accurately reflect anything about HN. Just read back what you wrote:

> AI-assisted version could have been deployed 10x faster. By then, enough real-world feedback would have surfaced to identify the major issues

You want to ship major bugs to your users, let them find them, report them and fix them afterwards. You passively assume this is a good way to build software without even really questioning it.

Aside from some people just not liking this in principle, there are a lot of contexts where bugs cause actual harm and cost actual money. In some cases, "people dying" and "go to jail for it" type harm.

▲

voidfunc 5 hours ago | parent [-]

If everyone does it and the majority of users are captured in ways that they wont or cant seek out alternatives then shipping bugs to users, letting them find amd report them and then fixing them is business-optimal.

	▲	hun3 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		What keeps users themselves from vibe-coding their own software? If you don't own quality, why should I pay? You're just a middleman at that point.
	▲	kranner 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		It would potentially be more business-optimal to ship fewer bugs if everyone else is shipping more bugs. Your development cycle would be costlier, but users would prefer to buy your products over others.
	▲	fcatalan 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Skipping airplane maintenance is business-optimal for an airline. For a few months.
	▲	Planktonne 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		"Business-optimal" is not the same as "optimal".
	▲	ares623 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Pathetic state of affairs that this is said with a straight face. Jesus Christ. Software engineers deserve every hate that's coming for us.