Would you hire a VibeCoder to work on your product?
by•
I've been pretty impressed at the amount of products people (including myself) have been able to create which got me curious... do vibe coders or AI-primary builders have a place in a company or team?
My thinking is the more technically adept would work on the core-focus while vibecoders can assist with other tasks that shouldn't be the main devs focus...like a potential feature add, minor changes, or even exploring different ways of modifying the existing product.
I'm curious what you all think, would you hire a vibe coder?
3K views
Replies
minimalist phone: creating folders
Hey Gabe, answering to your question: Yes and No
For frontend, I would hire someone who is smart in designing (UX/UI) but also knows how to revert the design into code.
For backend and things related to safety, I wouldn't hire a vibecoder assuming he/she has no knowledge in coding and how to ensure data security.
@busmark_w_nika That would be the nice way to approach. For now, for prototyping a feature I may hire a vibecoder.
Product Hunt
@busmark_w_nika that's a pretty safe approach. Things like database and user information can be quite sensitive and is probably in better hands with someone who has experience and deep knowledge in crafting those types of systems.
@busmark_w_nika I think this is the most reasonable answer.
for sure. provided there's a good proof of work.
Dereference
@theanimeshs this matter a lot!
It entirely depends on how big the team is.
If it’s a team of 100+ people, I wouldn’t hire a VibeCoder.
But if it’s a company with just 1, 2, or 3 people= absolutely. If that vibe coder can build 50 times faster than other developers, why not? After all, that’s the fastest way to test my idea. If they can technically execute it in 5 days instead of 3 months, of course I’d trust them.
*Assuming they can deliver a quality product, not just slap something together.
Product Hunt
@byalexai I like this take. Essentially it's proof of work, like a resume. Can the vibecoder show that they add value where needed. How they get there is a bit less important.
Dereference
@byalexai What are you launching soon?
@adi_singh5 Video generator platform for UGC Ads
Dereference
@nithya_kumaran What are you launching soon?
@adi_singh5 we are launching our AI powered Trading application.
@adi_singh5 Thanks for asking
Your question touches on a very relevant and nuanced topic in today’s engineering landscape.
As a senior engineer, I absolutely see the appeal of AI-assisted development and the "vibe coding" approach—especially in rapid prototyping, hackathons, or early-stage explorations. AI tooling, in particular, has unlocked a new level of speed and accessibility for builders of all levels.
That said, I believe there’s an important distinction to make between building fast and building well, especially in the context of long-lived, collaborative codebases.
Vibe coding—by its nature—often skips over crucial context: architectural decisions, edge cases, historical workarounds, and implicit contracts between systems. These aren’t always visible in code alone, and AI still struggles to reason across larger codebases with the depth and nuance needed to make safe, maintainable contributions. There’s growing empirical evidence that heavy reliance on AI coding agents in large or legacy systems can degrade quality, increase entropy, and introduce subtle regressions over time.
In my view, AI tools (and vibe coders) are best positioned as augmentation, not autonomy. They can assist in generating boilerplate, exploring variants of implementation, or even proposing refactors—but always under the guidance of engineers who deeply understand the domain and constraints. As you mentioned, the "core focus" should remain under the care of experienced developers who take long-term maintainability, security, and performance seriously.
Would I hire a "vibe coder"? Maybe—as a junior dev with strong product instincts and an eagerness to learn, paired with seniors who can mentor and gate their changes appropriately. But I wouldn’t rely on vibe coding as a primary development model in a production setting unless the problem space is exceptionally well-bounded, disposable, or non-critical.
In short: AI and vibe coders can be highly productive, but without guardrails, they can also be like pouring gasoline on a codebase fire. We should use them—but use them wisely.
Dereference
@seunggon_kim What are you launching soon?
@adi_singh5 Thanks for the interest! I'll be launching Chewing Diet on August 14th. How's Dereference going?
Dereference
@seunggon_kim Great! Ready for launch anytime soon! Do you have a hunter?
@gabe Great thread, timely discussion. Wherever I do Fractional CMO consulting, I always insist on having 2-3 Marketers/ PMM with vibe coding skill. May not be required for Demandgen/ Inside Sales/ Inbound folks.
Product Hunt
@shashwat_ghosh_gtm I think marketing / comms folks that have vibecoding skills is such a huge win. They can build their own solutions without needing to tap eng resources and know exactly what they need for an MVP.
Dumbnote
Yeah sure but with an experienced with good fundamental on software development. Since when code based getting bigger it need foundation understanding especially when it come to debugging to fix the right problem.
Dereference
@viriya_reungwai well said!
Don't have a product, but I'm of the same mind as @busmark_w_nika. Especially with security in mind, I would not hire a vibecoder unless they have some underlying knowledge, either in programming or security, hopefully both.
Dereference
I'm not convinced by the hype around 'vibe coders'. At the end of the day, building a successful product still requires a solid foundation in software engineering fundamentals, not just a 'vibe'.
Meta just started allowing Vibecoding tools in their interviews! so it is "ZUCKERBERG" approved
and i think more and more companies will take this approach to ship faster!
So yaa why not!