Hitesh Umaletiya

AI didn’t make building hard things easy it made starting easy finishing something that actually works is still where most people fail

@rishikagupta__ Feels fast. Change is real, but resets don’t happen overnight. More likely a slow squeeze where expectations rise, teams shrink, and the bar for output keeps going up.

It feels like there is going to be a big reset in the IT industry within 6 months.

@fhinkel This is clever but I'd push back slightly. The debt isn't from the speed, it's from skipping code review and architecture thinking. Vibe coding as a prototyping tool is fine. Shipping it directly to prod without cleanup is the actual problem.

Vibe Coding makes you 10x faster at making 10x more technical debt.

@trikcode Mostly agree, but I'd add nuance. It depends what you're building and why. A founder validating an idea fast has different needs than a junior dev trying to grow. For the latter, vibe coding without learning is a slow trap. For the former, it's just smart leverage.

The dangerous thing about vibe coding is you stop learning. You don't know why it works. You just know it works. Until it doesn't. And then you're Googling concepts you should've learned three years ago.

@kylegawley The flow problem is real and underrated. More output is not the same as more progress. The context switching between AI suggestions, reviewing, fixing, and re-prompting breaks deep thinking. Worth being intentional about when you go heads-down vs when you lean on AI.

AI has increased my code output But I'm not more productive I feel like it's harder to focus on tasks and get meaningful work done because I'm never in flow

@sweatystartup Respectfully disagree on the timeline. Energy costs are real, but competition is brutal. OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic are all racing to drive costs down. AI won't get 5x pricier. It'll get 5x cheaper. Companies that bet on AI now are building a moat, not a trap.

The AI bubble will pop: Electricity will 2x in cost again over the next 24 months. AI companies will need to 5x prices to break even. Companies who depend on AI will see costs 5x and will be screwed. Users will vanish. Market will plummet.

@alexwtlf The 2030 part is the most honest take here. AI handles the build, but complexity compounds. Maintenance, debugging, and evolving systems still need people who understand the underlying architecture. Solo builders win short-term. Teams win long-term.

2010: I need a team of 50 to build this 2026: I need a laptop and Claude 2030: I need a team of 50 to build this

@pauliusztin_ Interesting, but I'd push back a bit. Claude Code's tighter integration with the terminal is hard to replace once you're used to it. OpenCode has potential though. Tool choice really depends on your workflow. Would be curious to see a real side-by-side comparison.

I've switched from Claude Code to OpenCode, and I'm loving it! With the same Claude Pro subscription, OpenCode has nailed a better harness of the agents. It feels like it's getting your ideas even in more depth than Claude Code usually one-shotting all your tasks. Also, I love that the code is open source. I've started reading it. Will soon push an article on how its agent orchestration works. And the cherry on top is that their terminal UI is dope! What's your take on Claude Code vs. Open Code?

@Alex_TheAnalyst Partially agree. The concern is real but it's not AI's fault. Calculators didn't kill math skill entirely. The people who stop thinking were probably not deeply engaged to begin with. What AI does expose is weak foundations, and that's actually a useful signal.

I'm going to call this right now. We are going to have a large population with absolutely no critical thinking skills if they blindly trust AI for everything. We have all already seen it. They don't validate outputs. They don't really understand anything. They just ask questions, it looks good, and they go with it. There are going to be huge issues in every company as this continues over the years. The amount of technical debt and knowledge gaps are going to be insane. So much opportunity if you actually know what you're doing.

@joni_vrbt Yes, you built it. But I'd be transparent about how. The skill is in knowing what to prompt, what to review, and what decisions to make. That's real work. Hiding the tooling is where it starts to feel dishonest.

Let’s finally agree on this. If I vibe coded a project, can I still tell people that I built it?

@askwhykartik 100% this. AI amplifies your skills but also amplifies your blind spots. The devs who truly benefit are those who already understand what good code looks like. The gas pedal analogy is perfect. Blind trust in output is where projects go sideways.

I use Claude Code every single day. It probably saves me 3-4 hours on every project. But here's what nobody says: If I didn't know Flutter, Firebase, and how backends actually work Claude would've destroyed my client projects by now. It confidently writes wrong code. It confidently misses edge cases. It confidently breaks production. You need the judgment to catch it. Judgment only comes from actually learning. AI is the gas pedal. You still need to know how to drive.

@xoaanya The ones you actually understand, not just autocomplete in. AI didn’t teach most people languages, it made them feel fluent. Big difference.

If Al tools disappeared tomorrow, which programming languages would you still be confident coding in??

@svpino Mostly agree. Skipping code review works until it really doesn’t. For low-stakes stuff, fine. For anything critical, that’s how you ship silent bugs and security issues. The gap isn’t AI vs human, it’s accountability. That’s what companies will clamp down on.

Let's be honest, most people ain't checking the code they're writing with AI. Yeah, it may be important, and we are always yapping about how you gotta do it, but there's absolutely zero chance most people are taking the time to slow down and go line by line, trying to understand everything the model wrote. It's just too easy to produce a billion lines of code now. It's even easier to test the product (rather than the code) and ask the model to fix whatever you don't like. And you know what? I think not looking at the code is fine for many. I've seen a lot of code 100% written by humans. Some of it is an immense pile of garbage, and nobody has died. 100% AI-generated is actually an improvement for those products. But there are many places that can't afford slop, and we always take things too far. Non-supervised AI-generated code is dangerous. There will be some blowback, and companies will start getting very wary of AI cowboys. Some might outright ban AI-generated code, and some will figure out how to make developers liable for their code.

@OfficialLoganK True. We optimized for writing code, not validating it. Now the bottleneck is trust. Review, testing, and context are lagging behind generation. That gap is going to define the next wave of tools.

The bottleneck has so quickly moved from code generation to code review that it is actually a bit jarring. None of the current systems / norms are setup for this world yet.

@KevinSzabo14 Exactly. AI should extend your thinking, not replace it. The moment you stop questioning and just accept outputs, you’re not faster, you’re just outsourcing judgment.

It's not a problem when you use AI. It's a problem if you stop thinking simply because you have AI.

@dharanshi_ Depends on the task. Claude is great for long context and reasoning, ChatGPT is better for speed, tooling, and iteration. I usually switch between both.

as a developer, chatgpt or claude?

@HackingDave Harsh, but not wrong. There’s a lot of noise. But throwing everything out isn’t the move either. Some of those workflows are useful, just not universal. The real edge is testing what works for you and ignoring the hype cycle.

What I’m realizing is 99.9999999999999999999999999% of AI posts are from people that are trying to get more followers and clicks and has no real world experience on actually deploying. “Improve your workflow 80% by this one Claude skill” “Omg they just released this and it changes the industry completely” It’s all bogus. Create your own workflow that is tailored to you. Don’t buy into this garbage.

@hariprasad_bg “That it’s plug and play.” Most teams underestimate how much thinking, context, and iteration it takes to get real value. The hard part didn’t disappear, it just moved.

What is the biggest lie in AI? I’ll go first: “It’s going to take your job.” What’s yours?

@mjackson Agree. Speed is up, standards are slipping. You can ship fast, but if the bar drops, you pay for it later. Tech debt doesn’t show up day one, but it always shows up.

It’s easier than ever to write a lot of code very quickly. I think it’s actually still quite difficult to ship a lot of code without lowering the bar. Technical debt is real. It will ultimately slow you down if ignored.

@StevenCravotta Partly true, but “just do TikTok” is oversold. Distribution matters, but retention decides everything. If the product doesn’t stick, viral just accelerates churn. The real edge is product that keeps users + distribution that brings them in.

The app space is saturated is a complete myth. 95% of apps have no idea about distribution. The barrier to entry to BUILD apps has gone down to zero. But the barrier to MARKET apps is still high. If you know how to create viral TikToks, you can dominate. The building part is solved. The marketing part is wide open.