I would definitely use this but why wouldn't they have it search movies under CC BY-SA, CC BY, CC BY-NC or CC BY-NC-ND instead of just public domain.
This is a slop project. I doubt it will be any good or will see improvements without opening yourself to security issues
while the production build runs entirely client-side without a backend server. I
This eliminates many, many potential security issues and is an excellent design choice.
In production, movie data is queried using an in-browser SQLite database via WebAssembly, e
Cool idea but man I won’t be touching that with a ten foot pole.
Isn’t it obvious?
I heavily relied on agentic development (as an additional learning goal) using OpenCode (with Sonnet 4.5 and Gemini 3 Flash and the beads tracker).
I vibe coded once and after I saw the generated code, I will not let anything like that on my home network.
For the record, not all agentic coding is "vibe coding". It is possible to do real engineering with an LLM.
In the same way the advent of the compiler helped us go from high-level human-readable formal language to low-level machine-readable formal language, an LLM helps us go from high-level natural language to high-level human-readable formal language. The distinction between vibing and engineering is how much intention you have about what the tool spits out the other side.
Vibing says "all I have is an input, I don't know what the output should be, so I'm not even going to look at it". Engineering says "I have an intended output in my head, and I'm using whatever tool will reliably create my intention the fastest".
A compiler is deterministic. LLMs are by definition nondeterministic.
Trying to understand where you might be going with this. Is the implication that non-deterministic/stochastic algorithms have no practical use in engineering?
No, they have a place where stochastic algorithms are necessary. For writing a hello world application, no stochastic algorithm is necessary. Comparing compilers with LLMs is comparing apples with oranges.
I think it will become more apparent over time. But consider that the practice of software engineering is a stochastic process. Give 10 different engineers the same goal, and you'll get 10 different solutions.
At that rate me walking to the store is stochastic because a grand piano could fall on my head. We have to draw the line at some logical point.
What line are we trying to draw exactly? I think that's the part I'm still confused on.
Yes, walking to the store is a stochastic process. Ask anyone working at google maps.
I think you’re arguing for arguing’s sake. If you don’t see the point by now, then I am unable to make it more clear. I’m sorry.
You're saying "we have to draw the line". If I'm understanding the discussion at hand, I'm saying: we don't. But I'd like to clarify what line it is you think we need to draw.
I think this is an interesting discussion to have, but if it's not enjoyable to you, we can end it here. Cheers.
Edit: reading back again, I think you're saying we need to draw the line and only use stochastic solutions for problems that necessitate them. That's fair, ex. it's inefficient, and error prone to invoke an AI to sort a list.
But rarely do humans have unsorted, well tabulated lists that they need sorted. Most people's goals are stochastic. They have photos that need organized by location, event, content, etc. They have hundreds of emails from customers all asking the same trivial questions in different ways. They are going to meet a friend at the store across town and need to give an ETA.
Goals are only well defined if you only operate inside the well-defined space of formal languages. But the formal languages don't exist for their own sake, at the end of the day, we built computers to solve amorphous, difficult to describe, human problems, and the messiness of software engineering has always reflected that.
If a SW dev applicant gives a 20-file generated output for a 20-line assessment problem and can't explain single lines of "their" code, either what they should be doing or why "they" had written it, it's gonna be a no from me, dawg. A standard problem might have different solutions, but fixing the issue of the day to the satisfaction of a rabidly vocal customer base might have one at most, and it will change multiple times on a whim.
So the LLM might have helped them cheat their way to an MSc, but there's no cheating your way through real life.
What you're describing is "vibe coding". For the difference between vibe coding and engineering, I'll refer you to my previous comment.
Edit: had problems with opening your link, replying to your linked comment now...
Unfortunately it is the nature of the anti-coding-LLM debate that people who never wrote a line of assembly language, and never in their lives wrote a line of code that wouldn't be run in a managed runtime of some kind, now think they're the Masters of the Coding Universe and are qualified to dictate what are the Right Tools and the Wrong Tools to be a Real Programmer(tm).
Fortunately, as you rightly point out we've seen this dance a hundred times before. This too shall pass.
Exactly. Vibe coding is horrible in the wrong hands, but a skilled programmer can utilise it to carry out boring tasks.
If you’re still learning to code, you can’t evaluate the quality of the output, which will result in wild goose chases, wasted hours and tangled low quality scribble code. If you can find and fix the mistakes, you can actually make certain tasks go much faster. Also, don’t let an LLM write more than 20-50 lines at a time. Finding mistakes in longer segments gets very tricky.
If you have a plan in your head, you can request short segments like that. If you let the LLM take care of everything, it’s just going to dump 200 lines, and then you’ll need to rewrite most of it by hand. Gradual step by step approach works well, but it requires constant oversight.
Vibe coding is horrible in the wrong hands, but a skilled programmer can utilise it to carry out boring tasks.
If things continue as they are, eventually there will be no more skilled programmers.
If producing quality code no longer requires skilled programmers, you’re right. As it stands, LLMs produce very raw code that absolutely requires lots of human oversight to qualify as functional.
Nah, I agree with them. All the skilled programmers are getting fired by a bunch of companies with poor financial sense who want to blame everything on AI. Also, if this thread shows anything, then it's that prospective skilled programmers would rather ask Claude to do their homework for that quick dopamine hit than actually learn that they're supposed to use parameterized queries so that some random kid's mom doesn't delete their production database.
If they figure out a way to refine the slop code with another agent, there will be hardly any need for programmers in the future. We’ll see how that works out.
In the meanwhile, LLMs are being used for cyberattacks and many companies are deploying lots of vibe code everywhere. What could go right…
I am convinced most of the people who hate LLM Assisted coding are all the dicks from Stack Overflow who are pissy that everyone found a better resource to ask questions against.
No actually. It's because I ran pyright and there are nearly 1000 type errors. It's because your LLM decided to setattr and getattr all over these Pydantic models. It's because for some reason you're using protocols where an ABC would make more sense. It's because I told you all this on your last PR, you fixed it that time for the most part, then you're doing the same thing again on this PR. And it's because now I have to open a PR that conflicts with one of the 200 files your PR touched fixing all the problems your LLM introduced. All this because you refused to read the docs for two packages and follow the examples.
Look, I'm not calling you out specifically. I'm just ranting about my day job.
This sounds exactly like your typical SO reply and I can't tell if its intended to be satire.
Sounds to me like you haven't worked on a team before.
I lead several teams, but I am not a coder by profession, I just code as a hobby.
well that is one way to find gems like this https://select.github.io/movies/movie/tt0402854
Not sure what to make of that though
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.