> You wouldn't trust an engineer a bridge that an engineer vibe-engineered would you? If it was as easy to stress test/battery test/materials test/etc a bridge

> You wouldn't trust an engineer a bridge that an engineer vibe-engineered would you? If it was as easy to stress test/battery test/materials test/etc a bridge as it is to test code - then yes. I'd trust an engineer who vibe-engineered a bridge. --- The problem with mapping digital problems into meat-space is that there is inherently a few orders of magnitude of cost automatically added to anything that happens in meat-space. I can spin up an arbitrary number (10, 10k, 500k) docker instances, X with fuzzed inputs, Y with explicit edge cases, Z with tolerance testing, etc etc. And if that doesn't work - I can fix and push a button and it just happens again. If a bridge engineer could do that with bridges - yes I'd expect them to be vibing just as hard as we are now.