I need to be very clear, that the push towards "vibe coding" - that is, deliberately deskilling people - is because AI code assistants are an (increasingly expensive) subscription service.

If you know how to code, you can just write Python, C, Java, R, PHP, whatever for free and make things. You may not own the tools of production, but at least you're not renting them.

If you have been deskilled so you only know how to vibe code, you will be paying for that privilege forever.

This also goes, by the way, for researchers who are starting to be convinced they don't need to learn how to be scientists anymore, because "the AI" can just do the science for them. Nope.

@jimbob I am wondering where acceptable tool use while coding stops and unacceptable use of AI for coding begins in your view?
@ErikJonker great question! where does it for you?
@tivasyk ..for a non-experienced, very casual coder , AI is great for explaining syntax, commands , debug etcetera, the fact that it hallucinates and sometimes makes mistakes is no problem whatsoever in the very limited coding I am doing 😀, also for learning it's great because AI is interactive, I can ask questions, ask it to elaborate or find another way for a problem etcetera really unparalleled with anything available before
@ErikJonker thank you for developing! as i said in another post here, i don't have a problem with individuals using llm's the way that makes sence to them and brings them joy.

now, this might seem agressive, but please bear with me: while elaborating on your use of llm's, you have not answered my question, or rather _your own question_ to the topic starter: where do _you_ draw the line between the acceptable and unacceptable use of llm for programming?
@tivasyk ...it's unacceptable if checks & balances are no in a place, no LLM output can be trusted. I also would employ it in supporting roles, checking for bugs, suggesting improvements etc, NOT for writing the main code for large systems/processes in business or government.