Top
Best
New

Posted by speckx 10 hours ago

AI coding is gambling(notes.visaint.space)
309 points | 381 commentspage 5
mika-el 7 hours ago|
depends on bet size. small scoped tasks with tight specs — agents are reliable. "build this feature" with no constraints — yeah that's gambling. I am 90% positive most agent failures I see are from vague task definitions, not model limitations. basically the fix is better scoping not better models
hodder 8 hours ago||
Depending on anyone for anything is gambling.
apf6 7 hours ago||
Hiring a human is gambling too.
NickNaraghi 9 hours ago||
It's only "gambling" for now...

The odds of success feel like gambling. 60%, or 40%, or worse. This is downstream of model quality.

Soon, 80%, 95%, 99%, 99.99%. Then, it won't be "gambling" anymore.

krupan 9 hours ago|
Have you ever heard of an extrapolation like that being incorrect?
6thbit 6 hours ago||
Come on now. I pull the slot machine every time I ask my coworker Digbert to work on a ticket.

Will Digbert be able to handle it or will he pretend to handle it? Or will he handle it in a way that it will break again in six weeks and will evolve into his full time job for a year?

If this is gambling, middle management has been gambling for too long.

muwtyhg 6 hours ago|
You know there is a difference between a tool being unable to predictably accomplish its task, and asking employees to do work and them failing to do so. The accountability alone is leagues apart.
6thbit 4 hours ago||
Digbert is also unable to predictably accomplish the task.

I'm not arguing against accountability, only against gambling.

batuhandumani 7 hours ago||
Life is a gamble
rvz 10 hours ago||
It is indeed gambling. You are spending more tokens hoping that the agent aligns with your desired output from your prompt. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Watching vibe gamblers hooked onto coding agents who can't solve fizz buzz in Rust are given promotional offers by Anthropic [0] for free token allowances that are the equivalent in the casino of free $20 bets or free spins at the casino to win until March 27, 2026.

The house (Anthropic) always wins.

[0] https://support.claude.com/en/articles/14063676-claude-march...

samschooler 10 hours ago||
I think there are levels to this.

- One shot or "spray and pray" prompt only vibe coding: gambling.

- Spec driven TDD AI vibe coding: more akin to poker.

- Normal coding (maybe with tab auto complete): eating veggies/work.

Notably though gambling has the massive downside of losing your entire life and life savings. Being in the "vibe coding" bucket's worse case is being insufferable to your friends and family, wasting your time, and spending $200/month on a max plan.

parliament32 10 hours ago|
You remind me of those guys who swear they have a "system" at the casino.
samschooler 9 hours ago||
I'm not saying I have a system. I'm saying there are levels to this stuff. It's not a binary "gambling" or "not gambling".
macinjosh 7 hours ago|
I disagree. I have a successful software product that I vibe coded using claude code starting last June. It does something novel and useful that wasn't yet offered on the App Store or any app on Android.

I am not going to say what it is because all of the AI haters will immediately flock to leave it bad reviews and overwhelm my support systems with bad faith requests (something that has already happened).

I've been writing software for 25 years, I know what I am doing. Every bug I shipped was my fault either because I didn't test well enough or I did not possess enough platform knowledge to know myself the right way to do things. "Unknown unknowns"

But I have also learned better ways to do things and fixed every bug using AI tools. I don't read the code. I may scan it to gain context and then tweak a single value myself, but beyond that I don't write or read code anymore.

Its not a magical few shot prompt then reap profits machine. I just feel like a solopreneur ditch digger who just got a lease on a new CAT excavator. I can get work done faster I can also do damage faster if I am not careful.

Beyond this concern,

More comments...