If you think the market will clear simply by doing this then you’re utterly delusional.

Right.

So how long do we have to wait? The reality is the actual output doesn’t match the hype at all.

Software engineers should be getting laid off all over the place, there should be a decrease in hiring period. This is not what’s happening.

I've personally recreated two applications with 100% vibe engineering, now I'm saving about 100€/year - forever.

Dunno if the companies whose product subscriptions I've cancelled will fire people because of it though. Maybe eventually?

...and ultra high velocity single human person agent swarm vibe coded replacements for existing software and SaaS should come out en masse. Where are they?

I understand Codex had 500k weekly users at the beginning of the year, now they have 4M.

GPT 5.4 came out at the start of March, GPT 5.5 end of April.

What do you expect, that we all go to market with a Photoshop competitor within two months?

Edit: and I can't provide any more replies since once again some automatic system or a mod rate limited my account for whatever reason.

You seem to be arguing that vibecoding photoshop wasn't possible up until 2 months ago, with GPT 5.4/5.5.

That's a very, very weird take on many, many levels. Could you elaborate a bit about where that view came from, how often you use AI, what's your career etc.?

In b4 agents have been shit up until a month ago. There hasn’t been much time yet!!

This is pretty much true.

Before Codex with GPT 5.4 and 5.5 I was working on a single feature only, no parallel conversations, and a ton of permission prompts would make it impossible for the agent to even work for five minutes on its own.

Times have changed.

People like you write a whole lot.

Talk about the numbers.

Cost reduction and revenue generation.

Anything else irrelevant - nobody cares. The world is about making money and moving things forward.

Let's see at the end of the year how that went with the supposedly disappointing actual output and no layoffs.

Sure, let’s see. So far there is nothing to justify the hype, and there is a lot of money and hype around this, and a lot of fervent true believers.

I am working like 20 hours a week on my new iOS app with Codex.

People on here talk like it was some belief or suggest I am somehow profiting from "hyping" AI.

Is it so hard to believe that agentic coding now works? Engineers are taking it up left and right.

Edit with reply: I can't, because the app is still in the works. Also my HN account is again rate limited and I won't be able to post more comments.

Edit number two to the other comment:

It's not really that expensive. With Anthropic it would be $200, with Codex the $100 subscription is sufficient.

It is interesting phrasing when you say that the providers "are making me think" the use of their service would be better, rather than me reaching this conclusion myself after using their services extensively for my work.

And honestly, I think I've had it with HN. I can't even participate properly in the discussion, maybe because some moderator thought my comments and opinions unworthy again.

Can you share a link to your app?

I recently had a coworker open my eyes to why vibe coding, or AI-assisted coding is so popular. He likened it to a slot machine, where pulling the slot's arm is like asking an LLM to code something. You get crap most of the time, but when it works, it's like getting a payout. That dopamine hit keeps them pulling, hoping for another hit, and they then believe it's a better way to develop software.

The difference is that you don't just pull again.

You guide the originally mediocre result towards a good outcome by providing feedback and potentially technical insights.

That's not a gamble, it works reliably enough.

Oh that’s definitely it. Even Steve Yegge mad with vibecoded powers has said it feels a lot like gambling. I wouldn’t trust the judgment of gamblers talking about their ‘winnings’, so to speak.

Hey, rate limits are incredibly frustrating, but contributing to HN is worth it. Try writing a polite, brief email to hn@ycombinator.com with a link to your user profile. Tell them that you’ve re-read the HN guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and that you’re willing to follow them. Then ask if it would be possible for the rate limit to be removed.

My gut reaction looking over your account is that you mean well but get a little heated. For example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48147587 responds to no one in particular and calls HN drivel. Don’t do that. Thoughts like that are normal, but expressing them is difficult to do in a substantive way. It’s often better to not say anything if you feel yourself getting upset. (There are plenty of exceptions to this, but you have to do it in a way where you’re writing for the audience here, not for yourself.)

I think if you really put your mind to it, you can write substantively and stay off the rate limit list. Good luck.

Thanks, I appreciate the info.

But I don't think I'm going to email the mods and beg them to remove me from some list they added me to without notifying me.

I don’t feel like apologizing for complaining about the drivel some write because they don't like LLMs.

It was not my most substantial or productive comment, but I feel it is fair enough and did not target anyone in particular.

Contributing to HN is not worth it.

I'm spending my time, compromising my privacy, and advising potential competitors on what works best in my workflow. It's often not appreciated, so I might as well stop commenting so much.

> People on here talk like it was some belief or suggest I am somehow profiting from "hyping" AI.

Not really, the "people on here" rather consider that Anthropic and co. are profiting from you by making you think it's better to give them money to develop your app rather than do it yourself or hire a developer. The hype is there to steer you towards AI.

20 hours a week must be quite expensive in tokens.

Companies are forward looking, they wouldn't wait until the end of the year if LLMs were truly as disruptive as AI believers are saying.