"Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong was the recipient of some very bad vibes last week after bragging on X that nearly half his exchange's code is already AI-generated, with plans to push it higher. The post unleashed a torrent of ridicule, and seemed to crystalize the skepticism over the reliability of "vibe coding" tools that's been bubbling for months."
"Over the last couple of years, AI coding tools like Claude Code (Anthropic), Codex (OpenAI), Cursor, Lovable, and Replit have reached far beyond auto-completing lines of code; they can generate entire apps and features from a plain-language prompt, even for users with little or no coding experience. But even as enterprise execs hope the tools will speed up their software production, many in the development community are finding that while vibe coding may be great for slapping together demos, it's not so great for building secure, reliable, and explainable software."
""Code created by AI coding agents can become development hell," says Jack Zante Hays, a senior software engineer at PayPal who works on AI software development tools. He notes that while the tools can quickly spin up new features, they often generate technical debt, introducing bugs and maintenance burdens that must eventually be paid down with developer time and effort."
AI coding tools can produce large amounts of code from plain-language prompts and are being adopted to accelerate feature development. Widespread use has prompted ridicule and skepticism after claims that major portions of production code are AI-generated. Developers report that AI-generated code often creates bugs, hidden maintenance burdens, and technical debt that must be resolved later. Those downstream costs can negate initial speed gains and harm security, reliability, and explainability. Engineers worry that problems introduced by automated code generation may only surface long after software ships, increasing long-term development effort.
Read at Fast Company
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]