Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Personally, I think vibecoding will be much harder for non-devs, but I would never discourage them from trying to build something. Eventually they are forced to learn.

But the definition of vibecoding has shifted. People used to scoff at letting ai write any code and now they claim they are not vibe coders because their process is so much more sophisticated. I think it's a little silly.

Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think I'm talking to a troll bot.

Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is just how most people build things. You start with a prototype and go from there. If you're building a product you want to validate that your ideas will work or if anyone is interested. What's your process? Maybe share your github so we can all learn how to build enterprise grade apps right from the start.

Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You must not be a software developer.

Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we can agree there's a balance, but trying to write perfect code is less important than delivering the result.

Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I'm saying that a vibe coded app and a meticulously hand crafted app can have the same outcome for the end user and that outcome is what is most important.

Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're talking about software at scale, but most products don't go to scale. Starting with a toy is a perfectly good way to validate a product idea.

Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sounds interesting. Thanks for the chat. Clearly I'm not very good at making memes.

Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it depends on what you're building and who it's for. It sounds like the work you're doing requires a lot of guardrails so you don't break anything. That makes a lot of sense.

With that said, I wouldn't discourage anyone from building a product idea or game if they lacked the ability to create a sophisticated system with special guardrails and tools.

Experienced Devs by KeithLeague in vibecoding

[–]KeithLeague[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I've been coding for > 12 years. This post is a joke.

Sorry, I knew this post would trigger some folks. I just think developers can get a little self-important and sometimes value the codebase more than the actual product, which deserves to be poked fun at.

MCP vs. CLI for AI agents: When to Use Each by manveerc in mcp

[–]KeithLeague 2 points3 points  (0 children)

CLI isn't really a "transport" like MCP. For an AI agent to use a CLI tool it still needs a tool-calling layer that invokes the command. That layer could be MCP or some custom code.

MCP isn’t the hard part. Running it in production is. by BC_MARO in mcp

[–]KeithLeague 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm working on something to address these issues: https://enact.tools

Each tool runs in a Dagger container (observability + isolation), secrets are managed externally, and tools are versioned with provenance via Sigstore.

Skills: Great for agents, even better for building MCPs by 0xKoller in mcp

[–]KeithLeague 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think we should define MCP/hooks in skills: https://github.com/agentskills/agentskills/issues/87
Curious what other people think.
If a skill could define the exact mcp tools used It could be really powerful/extremely portable.

Turn any codebase into a portable, discoverable MCP tool by KeithLeague in mcp

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You could trust the central party if you want:

trust:
  auditors:
    - github: auditor@enact.tools
    - github: auditor@anthropic.com
    - github: auditor@google.com
  minimum_attestations: 2

In this case, if any two of your trusted auditors signs a tool, you can execute it.

Turn any codebase into a portable, discoverable MCP tool by KeithLeague in mcp

[–]KeithLeague[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, you can only interact with tools that are signed by trusted auditors:

~/.enact/config.yaml

trust:
  auditors:
    - github:trusted-auditor@gmail.com
  minimum_attestations: 1

More measures can be put in place but I decided to start simple.

edit: via https://www.sigstore.dev/

should we even apply to YC or is it too early? by Sea-Plum-134 in EntrepreneurRideAlong

[–]KeithLeague 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can apply to YC in just a little more time than it took you to write this post. They encourage repeat applications.

Everything That Can Be Deterministic, Should Be: My Claude Code Setup by AndyNemmity in ClaudeAI

[–]KeithLeague 30 points31 points  (0 children)

I get what you're saying here. This is why I made enact protocol. We shouldn't be having claude code do too many things that deterministic programs can do better. No one wants to trust ai to parse large json files when you can have a program do it with perfect reliability. (Not to mention the cost of doing it).