I looked up “vibe coding” in March of last year. The term had only existed for about a month. A month. And already people were arguing about what counted as vibe coding and what didn’t.

That’s when I realized we had a closing window to fix this before it stuck.

We’re Terrible at Naming Things

Our industry has a long history of bad naming. We call it “loading” when users want “showing.” We teach people to say “delete” when they mean “cancel” or “archive” or “remove from view.” Azure is the name for a cloudless sky—and it’s a cloud platform. GraphQL has nothing visual about it. Regular expressions aren’t regular.

And now we’re doing it again with “vibe coding.”

The Problem with Vibe Coding

The term implies you’re vibing with the code. But that’s not what most people mean when they use it. They’re not watching curly braces and semicolons appear on screen, feeling the rhythm of the syntax. They’re not vibing with the code at all.

They’re vibing with the solution. The app. The feature. The thing that solves their problem. The feeling of fulfilling a need.

When someone says, “I vibe-coded this app over the weekend,” they usually mean: “I had an idea/need, I described it to an AI tool, and it built something that works.” They didn’t look at the code. They don’t care about the code. The code isn’t what made them vibe.

Why This Matters

Words shape how we think. When we misname things, we create confusion about what we’re actually doing.

If you’re using AI tools to generate code you never look at, you’re not coding. You’re solving. You’re producing. You’re creating. But you’re not coding any more than pressing “print” makes you a printer.

The sensation people describe—that flow state, that creative momentum—isn’t coming from the code. It’s coming from seeing their ideas materialize. From solving a problem. From building something that works.

That’s not vibe coding. That’s vibe solving.

The Pattern Repeats

This isn’t new. We’ve been here before with every wave of accessible tools. Spreadsheets. FoxPro. Microsoft Access. Low-code platforms. Each time, we muddy the language instead of creating clear terms for what people are actually doing.

And each time, the imprecise language sticks around long after we realize it’s wrong.

I’m watching it happen again with “vibe coding.” And I’m afraid it’s going to stick—just like “delete” stuck, just like “load more” stuck—even though it doesn’t describe what people are actually experiencing.

What We Should Call It

If you’re looking at the solution, not the code, you’re solving. Own that.

If you’re describing what you need and letting AI figure out how to build it, you’re solving. Own that.

If you’re iterating on features and user experience without touching a line of code, you’re solving. Own that.

Vibe solving isn’t fake coding. It’s real problem-solving. It’s production. It’s creation.

The code is just the engine. You’re vibing with the ride.

One response to “Vibe Coding Is Just Bad Naming”

  1. “Vibe coding” is sloppy terminology for what is essentially prompt-driven solution engineering. AI-assisted creation is not coding; it is specifying and solving, so “vibe solving” could be the alternative. We saw this month or last some big hacks of AI-assisted creation which lacked the safeguards of real software-as-a-service stewardship. Creators become conductors, not instrument players. I have always had one foot in the conductor creator world and one foot in the coding world and one shoe is much more worn out than the other coding shoe (first decade, code-first, second decade, low-code first, third decade no-code first). Business Intelligence lives in the code only when necessary.

    A “vibe solving” is somewhat the discipline where creators (creatives) assemble products from AI‑generated components, similar to how musicians compose using digital instruments. I don’t think the conductor is every concerned that he/she isn’t the musician, but handcrafted music has survived so far since the introduction of electronic music. Still some will always only be interested in out comes not having invested the time to value the hand-crafted over the industrial productions.

Leave a Reply to Olaf SchroederCancel reply

Trending

Discover more from Claudio Lassala's Blog

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading