I tried, but I’m not sure I understand. The vibe tax is caused by the model trying to one-shot everything and doing so requires unnecessary tests? How are vibe coders training the model over months? Do you mean their sessions and preferences are being fed back into the RL?
supriyo-biswas 44 minutes ago [-]
I feel this, yes.
In effect, I’ve always wanted a pair programmer agent, not a zero to one programming agent. Unfortunately models these days are mostly of the latter kind and it has caused a major disruption in the way I work. I’d much rather appreciate a small model making fast and specific edits that I ask if it, rather than ingesting 20 files to make changes, and then starting to write tests, etc.
lilbigdoot 31 seconds ago [-]
Just said something similar myself in another thread. I'm either writing things by hand (and using LLMs for research, or double checking an idea), or having an LLM spit out something I treat as an external dependency. Its still too tedious for me to use them to write code when I care how it works or there's not obvious invariants the code needs to hold
Recently I had one write a tree node mapping function for an AST, a very common and mechanical task, but it did not pass context or early terminate the way it needed to and I got very confusion bugs later on because in 90% of cases that didn't matter. It ended up costing me time instead of saving it because I would've noticed the specific needs around passing context and early returns while writing the code myself
beezlewax 5 minutes ago [-]
I've found writing small well defined tickets and getting Claude to work on them works well for this type of workflow.
acedTrex 2 minutes ago [-]
This sounds miserable, why not just give it specific tasks to do in your normal workflow/editor? Why would we want to do MORE of the miserable task of ticket creation.
pgt 33 minutes ago [-]
Pre-October 2025, maybe yes. But now? Couldn't disagree more. There is no insight in this post.
esafak 42 minutes ago [-]
Create a spec and have a dumb model execute it. Problem solved.
hleszek 33 minutes ago [-]
Ask the AI to create a detailed spec according to a few simple requirements. Review the spec yourself and correct what you want changed. Then ask the AI to implement the spec. Each time you request something new, ask the AI to update the spec as well.
Rendered at 20:36:26 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
In effect, I’ve always wanted a pair programmer agent, not a zero to one programming agent. Unfortunately models these days are mostly of the latter kind and it has caused a major disruption in the way I work. I’d much rather appreciate a small model making fast and specific edits that I ask if it, rather than ingesting 20 files to make changes, and then starting to write tests, etc.
Recently I had one write a tree node mapping function for an AST, a very common and mechanical task, but it did not pass context or early terminate the way it needed to and I got very confusion bugs later on because in 90% of cases that didn't matter. It ended up costing me time instead of saving it because I would've noticed the specific needs around passing context and early returns while writing the code myself