These coders want AI to take their jobs
· Vox
Just over a year ago, OpenAI co-founder Andrej Karpathy coined the term “vibe coding” and it’s exactly what it sounds like. In a post on X, he wrote that it’s where “you fully give in to the vibes, embrace exponentials, and forget that the code even exists.”
Since then, coders from all backgrounds — and folks with zero experience — have tapped into their vibes to make apps and websites. Vibe coding platforms, powered by AI models like Claude, Codex, and Gemini, have gained traction as a way to give normies a toolset to code whatever they want, without writing a single line of script.
Visit sportbet.rodeo for more information.
Tech behemoths like Amazon and bustling Silicon Valley startups even have their coders using it. It’s doing the grunt work for now, but they say it’s opening up a whole new world of possibilities. One possibility: It takes their job. But it’s a trade-off that some of them are willing to make.
Clive Thompson wrote a book about this and spent time with over 70 vibe coders to understand how the technology is upending the industry and if this is the end of computer programming as we know it. On Today, Explained, co-host Sean Rameswaram dug into these questions and even vibe coded a simple website while doing it.
Below is an excerpt of the conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify.
You spent a lot of time hanging out with coders who were vibe coding. And from what I could tell from reading your piece in the New York Times Magazine is that they’re not vibe coding the same way that I was vibe coding.
No, they’re doing something that’s a lot more aggressive and ambitious. What they’re doing is they are using multiple agents, kind of swarms of agents at the same time. If they’re using Claude Code or Codex or Gemini they will have it wired into their laptops. Those agents can create files, destroy files. They can take code that’s been written, they can push it live into production in the world.
And they will also work little teams. So when they want to create a piece of software, sometimes they’ll write, like, a spec, like a page saying, “Here’s what I want to do.” Or sometimes they’ll just talk to the agent. But they’ll be kind of talking to the lead agent that’s going to be the head of the team and they’ll talk to it and say, “Here’s what I want you to do. What do you think? Give me your ideas.” And they’ll sort of go back and forth generating a plan. And when they’re confident that this top agent understands what is to be done, they’ll say, “All right. Go do it.”
And that one will spawn off several subagents. It will have one agent that’s writing code, another one that is testing the code. It’s quite wild to watch them do this. And sometimes if it does something wrong, they’ll have to yell at it. They’ll be like, “This is unacceptable.” Or they’ll say things like, you know, “This is embarrassing. You’re humiliating me.”
And I said to him, “What’s up with that? Does that language improve the sort of output of these agents?” And he was like, “I couldn’t prove it. But generally we find that when we sort of reprimand them a little bit, they become a little more reliable.”
Can you help us understand just how much time, money, human labor is being saved by vibe coding at the level that you observed?
Yeah, it can be really significant. They’re most significant when someone is building something new from scratch. The startup founders, one- or two-person, three-person shops, they’re like, “I need to get to market fast. There might be 10 other people with this idea. I got to beat them.” It’s dizzying. Some of those people were telling me that they were working 20 times faster than they would on their own. Stuff that would normally have taken them a day now takes half an hour.
But at a very large and mature company like Amazon or Google, you’ve got billions of lines of existing code and if one little part of it stops working, that could cascade through everything. So those folks are definitely using the agents, but they are less likely to be pushing stuff rapidly out. They’re more likely to be looking carefully at it and putting it through what’s known as code review, where multiple humans look at it and go, “Oh, okay, does that work?” So for them, basically it’s like a 10 percent improvement in terms of the velocity of productivity of the engineers, how fast they go from having an idea to making it happen.
And what’s really interesting, and you may have discovered this too, in your vibe coding: a lot of engineers told me that it was even less about speed than about the ability to experiment with a bunch of ideas and see which one might really work.
In the before times, you’d have an idea for a feature. Are you really going to spend six weeks developing it just to discover that it’s not really what you thought it was going to be?
Now, well, let’s just do 10 different versions of that over the next week and let’s look at all of them and then we can pick the one we want. You might not necessarily have gone faster, but the feature that you’ve got is exactly the one you wanted and you know because you held it in your hands.
A lot of tech layoffs in the past few years, and now we’re talking about how vibe coding has dramatically overturned the norms in engineering. How are developers feeling about that?
Well, here’s the thing. So there is definitely a civil war insofar as there is the majority of people that I spoke to, and I reached out to a very wide array — I talked to 75 developers.
And I actively wanted to talk to ones that didn’t like AI because I wanted to know their feelings. It’s a minority of people that are really hotly opposed, but they’re very, very strongly opposed. They don’t like the fact that these are trained on stolen materials. They don’t like the fact that it uses tons of energy. They don’t like the fact that they think it’s going to de-skill [people].
Why do you think they’re not the majority, when this is so clearly going to replace so many of them and bypass all of their ethical, moral concerns and objections?
I think it’s because for a lot of developers it’s just such a delightful experience in the short term of going from everything being a slow slog to it being like, “Oh my God, all these ideas and things I wanted to do, I can now try them and do them.”
Because it’s fun, basically.
It’s enormously fun. The pleasure of coding used to be that there were a lot of these little wins when you got something working. Those little wins have gone away because you’re not doing that bug fixing, you’re not doing that line writing.
So the big wins are just coming in avalanches and it’s very intoxicating. Also, there are ones who essentially don’t think that those bad labor things are going to obtain. They think there’s a potential that more [jobs] will get created in areas that they have previously been unable to be created.
Give it five years for us. Does this harken the end of computer programming as we know it?
No, I would not go so far as to say that it ends in five years. I do think it becomes something very different potentially. I still think — everyone told me, and I believe — that you still need some understanding of the way a code base works to do the complicated things.
Weirdly, what you might see is something a little different, which is the explosion of code in areas where there is currently none. There’s a bazillion people out there that are code-adjacent. You work in accounting, you are a wizard at Excel, and you can import data if you’re given the ability now to have an agent say, “Okay, could you bring more data in?”
There is going to be this really weird world where there’s a lot of customized software for an audience of two, three people. We have thought of software historically as something that only exists if 10,000 people or a million people want it because it costs a lot of money to make it.
But if you can now start making it for next to nothing, you can start using it the way that we use Post-it notes. Put it all over the place. I need to jot this idea down. I’m going to make this happen. And maybe this software solves one problem for this afternoon and we never use it again. Software starts becoming almost disposable.