I don’t think this is a very good or useful article because it is clearly someone who went into this “experiment” with a negative perspective on the whole thing and didn’t try very hard to make it work. Vibe coding as it stands today is, at best, a coin flip as to whether you can make something coherent and the chances of success rapidly diminish if the project can’t fit into about 50% of the context window. There are things you can do, and probably these things will be incorporated into tools in the future, that will improve your chances of achieving a good outcome. But I disagree with the author’s first statement that using LLMs in a coding workflow is trivial, because it is not. And the fact that they had a bad time proves that it is not. My perspective as someone who has a couple of decades of coding under their belt is that this technology can actually work but it’s a lot harder than anybody gives it credit for and there’s a major risk that LLMs are too unprofitable to continue to exist as tools in a few years.
I agree though with their last point - “don’t feel pressured to use these” - for sure. I think that is a healthy approach. Nobody knows how to use them properly yet so you won’t lose anything by sitting on the sidelines. And in fact, like I said, it’s completely possible that none of this will even be a thing in 5 years because it’s just too goddamn expensive.
Then their management doesn’t really understand what’s going on. In that case either they can decide to learn to use them a little better or they can set up two of them to have a conversation in the background all day every day to fudge the stats.