I'm using "agentic coding" like the author here, I'm not interested in "vibes" being a part of the name for what I do because there is no "vibes" about it
> “Vibe engineering”, really? ... Is this a stupid name? Yeah, probably. ... I’m ready to reclaim vibes for something more constructive.
Simon should have stopped after the first answer imho, we can find a better name for what we do as our profession increasingly adopts agent assisted development
A few days ago, I commented on a post. My comment was that vibe coding should no longer have a negative connotation because it is quickly, if not already, becoming the primary way to write software.
I mean, a lot of code is written using the NPM ecosystem, that doesn't make it good though. There are tons of objectively bad things that are popular.
"Tracking personal data on webpages is already becoming the primary way of advertising"
"Touchscreens are quickly becoming the primary way of interacting with one's car"
> Here’s the question a lot of developers are sitting with: do we lose some of our cognitive abilities if we’re reduced to reviewers? If we’re not writing the code, are we still thinking deeply about the problems? Or are we reduced to pattern-matching against LLM output, slowly atrophying the muscles we spent years building?
No, absolutely not. Please don't start to think that by not doing stuff on your own, you miss out on keeping yourself sharp and trained and on improving in this stuff.
If developers who have adopted LLMs for writing code start to think this, that might scare away some from using LLMs at all, and this weakens my evil plan to make a lot of money fixing their code with my intact coding abilities, especially when these LLM tools are going to get crazy expensive because at some point they will need to be sustainably funded, when I'll still be somewhat affordable in comparison. I'd rather get rich quick by doing the same thing I've been doing for years, don't take this from me please.
Haha. I can totally see a future where business hire outside consultants to fix in-house AI developed code and to train developers on AI pitfalls.
May be the design will be outsourced to consultancies and then implementation using AI is left to in house talent. May be new recommendation and lists like OWASP top 10 and 12 factors will emerge for AI too.
The author describes how their use of agents has transformed, not how "vibe" coding has transformed. See these passages for example
> But a year of daily use changes things. The way most engineers I know actually work with these tools now—myself included—has evolved into something different.
> What we’re actually doing # So if “vibe coding” doesn’t describe it, what does? I’ve been calling it agentic coding. The distinction matters: it’s using AI agents while maintaining the expertise and judgment that keeps the output good, rather than letting it rip with zero validation.
See also their passages around how using vibe coding for side projects is different from agentic coding for professional projects
> We’ve all collectively figured out what sustainable AI-assisted development looks like, and it turns out to be more structured than those early vibes.
Is this satire of AI hype? Genuinely can't tell if he's being serious.
Simonw had the same thoughts a while ago:
https://simonwillison.net/2025/Mar/19/vibe-coding/
https://simonwillison.net/2025/Oct/7/vibe-engineering/
I'm using "agentic coding" like the author here, I'm not interested in "vibes" being a part of the name for what I do because there is no "vibes" about it
> “Vibe engineering”, really? ... Is this a stupid name? Yeah, probably. ... I’m ready to reclaim vibes for something more constructive.
Simon should have stopped after the first answer imho, we can find a better name for what we do as our profession increasingly adopts agent assisted development
A few days ago, I commented on a post. My comment was that vibe coding should no longer have a negative connotation because it is quickly, if not already, becoming the primary way to write software.
Soon we'll have GPT 5.2 Pro performance at Cerebras inference latency. Then it'll get even better.
It would shock me if humans are still writing code in 5 years, unless it's for fun.
If nobody does, what will these models be trained on?
I guess only people writing code manually will be "frontier".
I mean, a lot of code is written using the NPM ecosystem, that doesn't make it good though. There are tons of objectively bad things that are popular. "Tracking personal data on webpages is already becoming the primary way of advertising" "Touchscreens are quickly becoming the primary way of interacting with one's car"
> Here’s the question a lot of developers are sitting with: do we lose some of our cognitive abilities if we’re reduced to reviewers? If we’re not writing the code, are we still thinking deeply about the problems? Or are we reduced to pattern-matching against LLM output, slowly atrophying the muscles we spent years building?
No, absolutely not. Please don't start to think that by not doing stuff on your own, you miss out on keeping yourself sharp and trained and on improving in this stuff.
If developers who have adopted LLMs for writing code start to think this, that might scare away some from using LLMs at all, and this weakens my evil plan to make a lot of money fixing their code with my intact coding abilities, especially when these LLM tools are going to get crazy expensive because at some point they will need to be sustainably funded, when I'll still be somewhat affordable in comparison. I'd rather get rich quick by doing the same thing I've been doing for years, don't take this from me please.
Haha. I can totally see a future where business hire outside consultants to fix in-house AI developed code and to train developers on AI pitfalls.
May be the design will be outsourced to consultancies and then implementation using AI is left to in house talent. May be new recommendation and lists like OWASP top 10 and 12 factors will emerge for AI too.
Author is conflating vibe coding with LLM-assisted development. Many such cases.
The author spent much time defining the differences. Where do you see conflation?
They explain it as if one has transformed into the other. Vibe coding has always been where you ignore the output.
The author describes how their use of agents has transformed, not how "vibe" coding has transformed. See these passages for example
> But a year of daily use changes things. The way most engineers I know actually work with these tools now—myself included—has evolved into something different.
> What we’re actually doing # So if “vibe coding” doesn’t describe it, what does? I’ve been calling it agentic coding. The distinction matters: it’s using AI agents while maintaining the expertise and judgment that keeps the output good, rather than letting it rip with zero validation.
See also their passages around how using vibe coding for side projects is different from agentic coding for professional projects
> Vibe coding has always been where you ignore the output.
Does this definition apply to (say) Fortran compilers from the 50s?
> We’ve all collectively figured out what sustainable AI-assisted development looks like, and it turns out to be more structured than those early vibes.
Is this satire of AI hype? Genuinely can't tell if he's being serious.