> It is not automatic, even with vibecoding, getting out a good app/site that solves a need in an elegant, functional manner for the user.
This feels like a vibecoded comment.
To address the "substance" of your "comment": yes, creating a polished product requires effort, but this is not a polished product: as pointed out by numerous commenters, it provides nothing new, and what it does provide is broken. Thus the GP's comment that it is vibecoded slop and not worth taking seriously.
My rhetorical question was broader, because GP comment was a generic one, not specific to this project.
I would ask you to be more mindful in your replies.
It doesn't matter, the answer is the same. Using vibecoding is less effort that not using it, so of late we see a lot of low-effort vibecoding projects, of which this is one. Ergo, vibecoding is an easily-spotted red flag for projects that are not worth taking seriously.
> I would ask you to be more mindful in your replies.
You should take your own advice. Also, don't be a dick.
> It doesn't matter, the answer is the same. Using vibecoding is less effort that not using it, so of late we see a lot of low-effort vibecoding projects, of which this is one. Ergo, vibecoding is an easily-spotted red flag for projects that are not worth taking seriously.
And the whole point of my initial reply was to question the definition of "effort".
> You should take your own advice. Also, don't be a dick.
I think your reply perfectly illustrates the situation.
Not a fruitful discussion anyway, enjoy clicking down arrows.
This feels like a vibecoded comment.
To address the "substance" of your "comment": yes, creating a polished product requires effort, but this is not a polished product: as pointed out by numerous commenters, it provides nothing new, and what it does provide is broken. Thus the GP's comment that it is vibecoded slop and not worth taking seriously.