If you review the code then committing as yourself makes perfect sense to me

Linux has used "Reviewed-by" trailers for many years. If you've only done minor editing, or none at all, it's something to consider.

If you review a juniors code, do you commit it under your name?

A junior is a person. A tool is a tool. Do you credit your text editor with authorship?

If it contributed significantly to the design and execution, and was a major contributing factor yes. Would you say a reserve parachute saved your life or would you say you saved your own life? What about the maker of the parachute?

I'd be thanking the reserve and the people who made it, and credit myself with the small action of slightly moving my hand as much as its worth.

Also, text editors would be a better analogy if the commit message referenced whether it was created in the web ui, tui, or desktop app.

I suppose that for me the tool rarely contributes to the design and execution. At work and for any project I care about, I prompt once I know what I want, in terms of both function and the shape of the program to do it. If the model gen matches the shape closely enough, I accept, otherwise iterate from there. To me this is authorship.

When I vibe code - which for me, means using very high level prompts and largely not reading the output - then I could see attributing authorship to a model; but then I wonder what the purpose of authorship attribution is to begin with. Is it to tell you who to talk to about the code? Is it personal attestation to quality, or to responsibility? Is it credit? Some combination of these certainly, but AI can hold none except the last, and the last is, to me, rather pointless. Objects don't have feelings and therefore are unaffected by whether credit is given or not; that's purely a human concern.

I suppose the dividing line is fuzzy and perhaps best judged on the basis of the obscenity rule, that is, I know it when I see it.

False equivalence. A text editor does not type characters that you didn't explicitly type or select.

That’s reviewing code vs contributing code.

The article talks about a specific solution they came up with. No way is this a representative example, they discard a typical pattern way at the top.

And startups not in the SV echo chamber. They happily exist and make money without worrying about supply chain attacks and js engine of the week.

Nothing about Spring forces you to use or engage in or use design patterns. If it does im pretty sure that's a plus. Juniors can have clear path towards being productive and feel quickly oriented.

Like sibling comment mentioned you can integrate anything with Spring Boot. Its a high productivity framework to accomplish alot. Your frustrations speak more to the job you took rather than the framework they forced you to use.

Do vibe coders need an api for an api? Sounds like something solvable with a skill

As someone with PWM sensitivity a low hz trend terrifies me

The dreaded "not aligned"!

One hundred percent. Leadership consolidating around like the rebirth of offshoring.

For the record all your prompts are tracked and easily viewable by whoever oversees it at your company. Don't prompt more than you have to and certainly don't give it your best ids. This is value at scale.

Im sure it overly affirms everything. People don't respond to "this idea is dumb and won't work"

For the AI frontier, I find my windows PC just about useless unfortunately. Too much tooling and package doesn't adapt to WSL+windows host well. I've shifted my entire dev experience to my mbp which used to be my backup. Can't imagine the new generation of vibe coder will even consider a windows box.

> Too much tooling and package doesn't adapt to WSL+windows host well

Curious about this, what specifically?