So you are suggesting we will soon drop the "vibe" from "vibe coding"?

I think we have been doing that for a while already. Seems like almost every major company is using LLMs for coding internally and people dont consider that vibe coding.

Culturally, it feels like we've already speedran the pipeline of "vibe coding is using LLMs without reading the code" to "vibe coding is using LLMs for code" to "using LLMs is just a tool for coding". LLMs seems to now be mostly accepted for coding (on HN at least), the discussion has shifted to how useful and in what ways.

	▲	cubefox 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah, but the semantic question is whether LLMs being accepted to use for coding means that the software engineer who merely instructs the LLM is thereby also "coding" (similar to how someone who merely writes Fortran, rather than machine code, is nowadays also described as "coding") or whether the only entity that is described here as "coding" is the LLM.