Post cover image
Photo from AI

June 13, 2026

Vibe Coding Is Dead. Most Developers Just Haven't Realized It Yet.

Divy Yadav

5 min read

Vibe Coding Is Dead.

The hidden costs of shipping code you don't understand.

Three startups shipped production apps this year.

None of the founders could fully explain how the login system worked. Not because they were bad developers.

Because they vibe-coded it: described what they wanted, accepted what the AI gave them, and moved on.

Two of those apps have already had user data exposed.

The third is sitting on a problem that a decent security review would find in under twenty minutes.

Three founders, three different companies, the same root cause.

Not a member? Click here

This is just how most of the industry builds software right now and there are issues rooted deeper into softwares. And no one is talking about how scary vibe coding could be

Welcome to another great article in the 'Dead Series'.

In this article, you'll not only learn why vibe coding can be dangerous, but also when it's perfectly reasonable to rely on it.

If you want more such information about AI, consider subscribing to my newsletter, where you will get noise-free AI information every week

Link for the newsletter: Newsletter

None

What is vibe coding, really?

If you've never heard the term, this is where it comes from.

In February 2025, Andrej Karpathy described a new way of building software. You describe what you want in plain English. The AI writes the code. You don't read it line by line. If something breaks, you just describe the problem again and let the AI fix it.

He called it "fully giving in to the vibes." The name stuck.

Think of it like ordering a custom-built house through text messages. You describe the rooms you want. A crew builds it overnight. You walk through, it looks great, you move in.

Nobody checked the wiring. Or whether the foundation can hold the weight. It looks finished, and "finished" and "safe" are not the same word.

Why everyone started doing it

The appeal is obvious once you try it.

  • A feature that used to take a day now takes an hour
  • You don't need to remember syntax; you just need to describe the goal
  • Prototypes that used to take a week now take an afternoon

By early 2026, this had become the default way most developers work. The vast majority of professional developers now use AI coding tools every week, and most of those sessions follow the same loop: prompt, generate, glance, commit.

For a side project, a prototype, or something you're testing for a weekend, this is genuinely fine.

The vibes are a reasonable shortcut when the stakes aren't high.

The trouble starts when "nothing serious" becomes "the app our customers pay for."

The 3 ways it breaks

None

1. Security debt nobody can see

When you don't read the code, you don't catch what's wrong with it. And AI-generated code has patterns of mistakes that differ from human mistakes, so the usual tools miss them too.

Security researchers who scanned over a thousand vibe-coded apps that were already live in production found that most of them had real security problems. A majority had at least one issue serious enough to count as critical, including exposed credentials and exposed personal data sitting in plain text.

There's even a new term for one of the attack patterns this opened up:

Slopsquatting.

An AI tool confidently suggests a package name that doesn't actually exist. Someone malicious registers that exact name first. Now they're just waiting for the next AI assistant to recommend it to the next developer, who installs it without a second thought.

The code runs. The tests pass. The vulnerability sits there quietly until someone finds it, and it's never the person who shipped it.

2. Comprehension debt

This is the one that rarely gets talked about, and it's the most dangerous.

Comprehension debt is what happens when your codebase keeps working, but no one on the team can actually explain why.

Picture inheriting a car where every part runs, but the manual is missing, half the parts are unlabeled, and the person who installed them left the company. It drives fine. Until it doesn't, and at that point you're starting from zero.

When a bug shows up in vibe-coded code, the instinct is to ask the AI to fix it. The AI patches the symptom. It doesn't necessarily understand the architecture either, because it never held the whole picture in its head; it just generated piece after piece on request.

Each patch adds another layer that nothing and no one fully accounts for. The codebase keeps "working." Understanding it keeps getting more expensive.

3. Technical debt that compounds, not adds

Normal technical debt is a shortcut you took on purpose. You know where it is. You can point at it.

Vibe coding debt hides by default.

One file ends up with a slightly different authentication pattern than the rest of the app.

A helper function gets rewritten from scratch instead of reused, because the AI didn't know it already existed. A database query works fine but quietly skips the conventions the rest of the team has been following for years.

None of these breaks anything on their own. But they pile up, and they interact.

The pattern shows up again and again across teams six to twelve months in: the early speed gains are gone, every new feature takes longer because the codebase can't be trusted, and refactoring becomes a prerequisite for doing anything new.

By the time this is visible, the cost of cleaning it up often costs more than what was saved by moving fast in the first place.

So what's actually dead?

AI-assisted coding itself is fine. That's not going anywhere, and it shouldn't.

The habit that's dying is narrower than that: accepting code you can't explain.

I think the skill shift here is simple, even if nobody's saying it out loud. Writing code fast used to be the thing that made you valuable. Now it's reading code fast, especially the AI-generated kind, and knowing exactly where it likes to hide its mistakes.

That's learnable. It's not about trusting AI less. It's about treating its output the way you'd treat a sharp junior developer's first pull request. Probably fine. Still worth a look. And once real users are involved, the "worth a look" part is no longer optional.

What to actually do

None

The thing worth remembering

Vibe coding gets blamed like it's a tooling problem. It's really a trust problem, and trust without verification is just hope wearing a hoodie.

The three founders from the start of this article didn't fail because they used AI to write code. They failed because somewhere along the way, "it works" started feeling like "it's safe." AI didn't create that confusion. It just made it a lot faster to not notice.

The vibes were never the problem. Shipping on vibes alone, with nobody ever checking the wiring, always was.

References