this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
1012 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

77090 readers
3519 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Just want to clarify, this is not my Substack, I'm just sharing this because I found it insightful.

The author describes himself as a "fractional CTO"(no clue what that means, don't ask me) and advisor. His clients asked him how they could leverage AI. He decided to experience it for himself. From the author(emphasis mine):

I forced myself to use Claude Code exclusively to build a product. Three months. Not a single line of code written by me. I wanted to experience what my clients were considering—100% AI adoption. I needed to know firsthand why that 95% failure rate exists.

I got the product launched. It worked. I was proud of what I’d created. Then came the moment that validated every concern in that MIT study: I needed to make a small change and realized I wasn’t confident I could do it. My own product, built under my direction, and I’d lost confidence in my ability to modify it.

Now when clients ask me about AI adoption, I can tell them exactly what 100% looks like: it looks like failure. Not immediate failure—that’s the trap. Initial metrics look great. You ship faster. You feel productive. Then three months later, you realize nobody actually understands what you’ve built.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] utopiah@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (25 children)

FWIW that's a good question but IMHO the better question is :

What kind of small things have you vibed out that you needed that didn't actually exist or at least you couldn't find after a 5min search on open source forges like CodeBerg, Gitblab, Github, etc?

Because making something quick that kind of works is nice... but why even do so in the first place if it's already out there, maybe maintained but at least tested?

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Since you put such emphasis on "better": I'd still like to have an answer to the one I posed.

Yours would be a reasonable follow-up question if we noticed that their vibed projects are utilities already available in the ecosystem. 👍

[–] utopiah@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Sure, you're right, I just worry (maybe needlessly) about people re-inventing the wheel because it's "easier" than searching without properly understand the cost of the entire process.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

people re-inventing the wheel because it’s “easier” than searching without properly understand the cost of the entire process.

A good LLM will do a web search first and copy its answer from there...

[–] MalMen@masto.pt 2 points 1 day ago

@MangoCats @utopiah exactly this... i did some small stuff out lf pastoring llms, but first searched for what I need, usually I find a small repo that kind of do what I want, then I clone it, change it a but using help of llm and if i think it is usefull I open a PR and let the mantainer decide if its good or not

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)