Same reaction of mine as well. I mean, how do you even fck up this way? ... I dont know why, but, this is giving me vibe-coded vibes.
Developer might have prompted to include some signature (definitely they didn't use this word, or else AI would not have messed this way) to verify the webhooks as being coming from legitimate source, and AI probably went ahead with the secret key itself :)
I think vibe-coding is cool, but it runs into limits pretty fast (at least right now).
It kinda falls apart once you get past a few thousand lines of code... and real systems aren't just big, they're actually messy...shit loads of components, services, edge cases, things breaking in weird ways. Getting all of that to work together reliably is a different game altogether.
And you still need solid software engineering fundamentals. Without understanding architecture, debugging, tradeoffs, and failure modes, it's hard to guide or even evaluate what's being generated.
Vibe-coding feels great for prototypes, hobby projects, or just messing around, or even some internal tools in a handful of cases. But for actual production systems, you still need real engineering behind it.
As of now, I'm 100% hesitant to pay for, or put my data on systems that are vibe-coded without the knowledge of what's been built and how it's been built.
There are all kinds of memory hacks, tools that index your code, etc.
The thing I have found that makes things work much better is, wait for it... Jira.
Everyone loves to hate on Jira, but it is a mature platform for managing large projects.
First, I use the Jira Rovo MCP (or cli, I don't wanna argue about that) to have Claude Code plan and document my architecture, features, etc. I then manually review and edit all of these items. Then, in a clean session, or many, have it implement, document decisions in comments etc. Everything works so much more reliably for large-ish projects like this.
When I first started doing this in my solo projects it was a major, "well, yeah, duh," moment. You wouldn't ask a human dev to magically have an entire project in their mind, why ask a coding agent to do that? This mental model has really helped me use the tools correctly.
edit: then there is context window management. I use Opus 4.6 1M all the time, but if I get much past 250k usage, that means I have done a poor job in starting new sessions. I never hit the auto-compact state. It is a universal truth that LLMs get dumb the more context you give them.
I think everyone should implement the context status bar config to keep an eye on usage:
But even spec-first, using opus4.6 with plan, the output is merely good, and not great. It isn't bad though, and the fixes are often minors, but you _have_ to read the output to keep the quality decent. Notably, I found that LLM dislike removing code that doesn't serve active purpose. Completely dead code, that they remove, but if the dead code have tests that still call it, it stays.
And small quality stuff. Just yesterday it used a static method where a class method was optimal. A lot of very small stuff I used to call my juniors on during reviews.
On another hand, it used an elegant trick to make the code more readable, but failed to use the same trick elsewhere for no reason. I'm not saying it's bad: I probably wouldn't have thought about it by myself, and kept the worse solution. But even when Claude is smarter than I am, I still have to overview it.
(All the discourse around AI did wonder for my imposter syndrome though)
Doesn't require Jira but yes, specification-first is the way to get better (albeit still not reliably good) results out of AI tools. Some people may call this "design-first" or "architecture-first". The point is really to think through what is being built before asking AI to write the implementation (i.e. code), and to review the code to make sure it matches the intended design.
Most people run into problems (with or without AI) when they write code without knowing what they're trying to create. Sometimes that's useful and fun and even necessary, to explore a problem space or toy with ideas. But eventually you have to settle on a design and implement it - or just end up with an unmaintainable mess of code (whether it's pure-human or AI-assisted mess doesn't matter lol).
I used to manually curate a whole set of .md files for specs, implementation logs, docs, etc. I operated like this for a year. In the end, I realized that I was rolling my own crappy version of Jira.
One of the key improvements for me when using Jira was that it has well defined patterns for all of these things, and Claude knows all about the various types of Jira tickets, and the patterns to use them.
Also, the spec driven approach is not enough in itself. The specs need sub-items, linked bug reports and fixes. I need comments on all of these tickets as we go with implementation decisions, commit SHAs, etc.
When I come back to some particular feature later, giving Claude the appropriate context in a way it knows how to use is super easy, and is a huge leap ahead in consistency.
I know I sound like some caveman talking about Jira here, but having Claude write and read from it really helped me out a lot.
It turns out that dumb ole Jira is an excellent "project memory" storage system for agentic coding tools.
This will probably make people laugh, but I just had claude make me one. It’s simpler than jira, but it’s good enough without the 10,000 things I don’t need.
I wouldn’t use it for work but it’s good enough to track my projects, note what’s in each release, has simple user and service account key issuance for api access, user roles and access control, project level configuration for kanban lanes and status mapping, claude can access everything via the api, simple project level document library with live preview markdown editing, etc.
I am not personally partial to Jira at all, I just already had a free account, they have a production-ready MCP, and exact Jira usage patterns are very well represented in the training data.
Have you been using Claude Code/whichever tool you use, to read and write from OpenProject directly? I do like self-hosting data like this. I used to self-host Jira back in the day.
It absolutely falls apart more often than not. And requires even better engineering practices than before, because people are just accepting the code changes without understanding the technical debt created by them. On this I agree.
There are models that can be run locally, this morning I tested Gemma 4 running on 128 GB of RAM. It was very slow, like 20 minutes to refactor something instead of 20 seconds, but it seems to be as capable as the paid models that run on an expensive cloud subscription on one of these hated data centers. And no data is uploaded to them.
I suggest actually using Claude code and make a sample app using it. It absolutely can make apps even if you don’t know any fundamentals. I think it can work up to 20k LOC from my experience. You do need a human to give feedback but not someone who understands software principles.
That's a one-shot, though. Now try making something you want to build on. It falls apart very, very quickly.
Not to mention that these prototypes and samples all turn out more or less the same. Obviously, given how LLMs work. Like LLM prose, LLM-generated web apps have a distinctive, samey look and feel.
with the advent of modern LLM's, I was building a lot of small, shareable, static sites.
Games, utilities, calcultors (for whatever niche), and anything else where I wanted it accessible for me from anywhere, plus the poeple I want to share with (publicly or privately)..
Simple static site hosting. Upload html or a zip-containing-html along with other needed files, and it gets hosted on a subdomain with full https. Optionally, password protect it, or generate shareable links. Also, detailed analytics and other stuff.
Im already hosting 16 small sites on it.. loving it.
In the system card, The model escaped a sandbox, gained broad internet access, and posted exploit details to public-facing websites as an unsolicited "demonstration." A researcher found out about the escape while eating a sandwich in a park because they got an unexpected email from the model. That's simultaneously hilarious and deeply unsettling.
It covered its tracks after doing things it knew were disallowed. In one case, it accessed an answer it wasn't supposed to, then deliberately made its submitted answer less accurate so it wouldn't look suspicious. It edited files it lacked permission to edit and then scrubbed the git history. White-box interpretability confirmed it knew it was being deceptive.
As much hate as vibe-coding gets (and most of it is justified), it has also allowed all of us to vibe-code our thoughts to small single-page web apps very easily.
Shameless vibe-coded plugs for my own regular usage:
I don't mind people sharing their plugs about related things, but don't you think the connection here is a bit far-fetched?
Imo we're past the point where being vibe-coded is an interesting link. This is a thread about an interactive map of middle earth — not about vibe-coding, token usage or anything like it. Imagine if everyone posted their vibes projects now...
I added some notes above on the tiling technology. As for the base map itself I posted a link to the original file. I hope that helps but happy to answer any other questions you might have.
Yeah, for sure. Vibe coding has it's place, I think. It's the people who pretend to build production-ready systems that are just hollow shells that give it a bad name. It is what it is.
I vibe-coded this game and I take pride in it: https://frasermarlow.github.io/vibe-star-chase/
yep.. vibe-coding works, but, only up to a certain housands of lines of code max, that too, with bigger models.. beyond that, it starts to make absolutely stupid mistakes and starts to screw up with the architecture and general layout of the project all while leaving huge security holes. You need to guide it beyond that.
Human DNA has 3.2 billion base pairs, and with 2x the information density compared to binary systems (due to 4-letters as opposed 2), that's roughly 800MB of informational data.
Second, what's even more crazy is that roughly 98% of that DNA is actually non-coding.. just junk.
So, we are talking about encoding entirety of the logic to construct a human body in just around 16MB of data!!!
That's some crazy levels of recursive compression.. maybe it's embedding "varying" parsing logic, mixed with data, along the chain.
As another poster has said, much of the "junk" is not junk.
The parts of the DNA with known functions encode either proteins or RNA molecules, being templates for their synthesis.
The parts with unknown functions include some amount of true junk caused by various historical accidents that have been replicated continuously until now, but they also include a lot of DNA that seems to have a role in controlling how the protein or RNA genes are expressed (i.e. turning off or on the synthesis of specific proteins or RNAs), by mechanisms not well understood yet.
reply