This 100%. Maybe I have a prompting skill issue, but without my guidance Opus (and now Fable) writes some gnarly stuff with tons of small bugs, and weird design decisions.

I find that it depends a lot on the project.

I'm doing solo mobile app projects, and I have no need to iterate on specs. The bottleneck is QA testing whether it works on the phone.

I don't need to carefully review and understand the implementation. It's not important whether I understand the details of how exactly UICollectionView in Apple's UIKit works.

I see that my implementation works on different physical devices, my tests cover device rotation, and I checked the memory allocations in the Instruments tool.

It has been some months of part-time work on my side, and I will publish this iOS app soon.

Without AI I could not have done it, the scope of the features is too large. The project is around 100k LOC.

It is not true that projects become unmaintainable and abandoned because of agentic engineering, or even vibecoding if you want to call it that.

LLMs still do not have proper contextual understanding of their solutions. Just couple days ago I was using GPT 5.5 with xhigh to vide code some application, and yet it defaulted for sorting dates from new to old by using plain string comparison. Just one of the many bugs.

it sometimes goes like this: vibecoding viberequirements, vibeleadership vibemanagement, vibecustomers

as a matter of taste, you can substitute "slop" as a prefix

I've never seen a greater disconnect between what I read on social media about vibe coding and what I've seen in real life.

In particular the whole "the best people are the ones who will use it the best". IME the best ones are the ones keeping it the most at arm's length while the people who embrace it the most churn out epic amounts of utter slop.

[flagged]