> people would know you were a skilled engineer. But now projects like that are worthless, because everyone just assumes they’re vibe-coded.

I do not really care what other people think. Build something for the purity of building it for yourself or for a purpose.

Thanks to AI, I feel like I have been writing the best code in my life. Yes, writing, not vibe-coding. I mainly just ask questions and ask for hints and clues. I do not use LLMs to do the fun parts for me.

I am currently working on a game. If and when I ever finish it, I want to be able to say that I wrote every single line by hand. Will it make me better than anyone? No, not at all. I want to do it for myself.

▲

parpfish a day ago | parent | next [-]

its interesting that people view different parts of the job as 'the fun part'.

you like typing out the code, but i see that as the drudgery that I have to slog through after the fun of drawing architecture diagrams and writing out the api specs.

	▲	hirvi74 a day ago \| parent [-]
		Different strokes for different folks. I have never written an architecture diagram or api spec in my entire career. I predict I would not want to do either.

▲

CuriouslyC 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In a few years we'll look at this the same way as people who unicycle or blacksmith.

▲

recursive a day ago | parent | next [-]

As interesting people.

	▲	esikich a day ago \| parent [-]
		Or dorky Luddite hipsters.

▲

lelanthran a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> In a few years we'll look at this the same way as people who unicycle or blacksmith.

It's equally likely that in a few years we see everyone who doesn't have skill the same way we view people who follow the Kardashians and other influencers: vacuous and incapable of non-augmented thought.

▲

hirvi74 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's fine with me. I'd even appreciate that even more. I get one life on this miserable planet. I am going to do what I enjoy for as long as I can. Call me a blacksmith or a Luddite, I couldn't care less. One thing you can never call me is unhappy.

▲

bigstrat2003 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

In a few years they will be the only competent people left who can save us from the deluge of AI slop. You should be nice to them, because you'll need them someday.

▲

gleezard a day ago | parent | next [-]

In a few years they will be the only competent people left who can use a loom. You should be nice to them, because you’ll need them someday.

▲

valegrete a day ago | parent [-]

The difference is that the textile machine workers could immediately verify the work product. This is impossible when the work product is a configuration of knowledge you don't actually have. It's why, for example, amateurs "solving" these open math problems refuse to discuss the results with actual mathematicians, because they can't. So we have a bunch of Lean-verified slop that may or may not actually prove what is claimed, without experts poring over everything line-by-line and reverse engineering.

▲

gleezard a day ago | parent [-]

Wrong.

Coding is a solved problem. Mathematics is a solved problem. Physics is a solved problem. Biology is a solved problem. Cancer is a solved problem.

	▲	owebmaster 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		AI can't even solve spamming, astroturfing, brigading, green accounts posting ragebait.

▲

esikich a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you think information is going to be destroyed or something? If this AI stuff is so sub par, why would anyone read/use/interact with it? Why wouldn't the "better" human created stuff float to the top?

▲

idiotsecant a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

the struggle of the artisan against the self is one of the more worthwhile struggles there is.

In an ideal world, we would all be able to do such a thing all the time, and not worry about our position in the howling ape hierarchy.

▲

daveguy 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I am 100% certain the code you write by hand will be better quality, even with AI pointing out options, than letting the AI string together completely obtuse abstractions.

▲

hirvi74 a day ago | parent [-]

GP here, hopefully you are correct.

I have two projects running concurrently. One is my hand-written project. The other is one "demolition zone." In the latter, I can vibe-code and do whatever I want just to see what LLMs can hack away at in comparison.

Besides the enjoyment I get from programming by hand, I have a more overarching concern when it comes to a building a full game. I am using Monogame, and I realized that is probably not the library to use if I am going to have no understanding of how things work under the hood. I tried to review LLM code, but without knowing enough of Monogame's API, I really couldn't make a good judgement call on the quality.

Looking at the LLM code, for example, were the keyboard and game pad implementations correct? I am not sure at first glance. I haven't implemented one since I used C++ in a game dev class in college over 12 years ago. The LLM's tests passed, which is fine and dandy, but how do I know the tests are truly valid if I do not understand what is fundamentally being tested?

I am not building this game entirely for fun either (though I am having a blast). I am working with a few non-technical friends on making this game. So, I do not want to disappoint them by creating something with bugs that I cannot fix because I have no earthly clue how anything works. I believe that would be embarrassing for me and disrespectful to them.

	▲	lelanthran a day ago \| parent [-]
		> The LLM's tests passed, which is fine and dandy, but how do I know the tests are truly valid if I do not understand what is fundamentally being tested? Do what I do sometimes: use opaque pointers (in C, or C++), and don't give the LLM the implementation, give them only the header, when asking it for tests. I've lost count of the number of times I'll give only the header, but the LLM insists it needs to see the implementation as well in order to write the tests. If you're not using C or C++, well, then write interfaces, give that to the LLM.

▲

vouaobrasil 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Good for you. But some people need others to know that they are skilled to get a job or to be part of a community. You must be one of those priveleged ones moderately far along in your career that you don't need to worry about that.

	▲	idiotsecant a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The fact that you 'need' that is not an inviolable feature of the universe. It's not even a good thing. It's just a thing that has evolved based on the current arrangement of society. It's as mutable as whether or not we have regular religious crusades.
	▲	hirvi74 a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		If you could see the quality of code I write or my career, you would likely change your assumption.