$85,000 in tokens later: What I learned from scaling agentic coding at Lovable

willtemperley•about 2 hours ago

Instead of employing an engineer for a year we burned an obscene amount of resources to generate code which will enable vibe coders to burn more resources.

But we’re lovable! Cute smile. Heart emoji.

gershy•4 minutes ago

I think this article may have been a lot more insightful if it gave some insight into what product goals were achieved.

justinclift•about 3 hours ago

> Reviewing AI-written code line-by-line isn't practical or a good use of anyone's time. And the usual answer to problems created by the use of AI is to use more AI, so you switch to AI reviews by default.

Ugh. Sure, for non-critical stuff that might be acceptable, but for anyone working on core banking or infrastructure PLEASE don't be doing this.

alunchbox•about 3 hours ago

It depends I imagine. Core bankend bank system, database, transactions and such sure, but what about the web and mobile client? I'm down to get better customer experience if they can ship faster without breaking the bank.

What about fraud detection and prevention? I hope to think I'm not alone in that perspective that it's acceptable in those cases.

hoppp•about 3 hours ago

Its fine for web and mobile as long as you can't get sued if data leaks or you get hacked.

kelseyfrog•about 1 hour ago

Fortunately AI lawyers are much cheaper than real lawyers.

justinclift•about 3 hours ago

> What about fraud detection and prevention?

It's easy to see both pros and cons of that. I guess, like most stuff, it depends upon the appetite for risk vs the downsides of false positives/negatives and incorrect analysis.

fragmede•about 2 hours ago

Fraud detection and prevention have been using AI to determine things long before ChatGPT came on the scene. Of course, they call it machine learning, but it's all linear algebra under the hood. Just that ChatGPT has a really big hood.

altmanaltman•38 minutes ago

For critical stuff, there is already a ton of regulations in place that prevent this kind of thing from happening. Why do people think programmers working in such industries have no oversight and can ship whatever they want and however they want? It simply doesn't work that way in those industries.

StrLght•about 1 hour ago

> During the first week of June I merged 293 PRs, and have found no production defects tracing back to those changes so far. The latter part is a bit of good luck — I think 2-3 minor and 1 major defect would be acceptable for this volume.

At this point, articles about LLMs paired with meaningless metrics have become a classic combo. I get that it's typical corporate BS, but publishing this widely is just weird. "Look, my productivity is skyrocketing according to a chart that only my manager cares about!"

Mitchell Hashimoto put it well: https://xcancel.com/mitchellh/status/2071971627748020409

tangenter•4 minutes ago

“Spotify ships 4,500 production deploys a day” LMAO

altmanaltman•33 minutes ago

I had an idea for a video long time ago. The idea was to try building lovable using lovable and then building another lovable within that using it. They market to normal people as if anything is possible but its very disingenous to offer a no code platform with the type of marketing they do. They are not alone, selling people the dream of "just use this to make a million dollar app!" while they make money off them even if the app works out or not.

These platforms should do a revenue-share pricing where all these amazing apps created on the platform should only pay it if the app actually generates revenue if they really buy their marketing.

aliclark•about 7 hours ago

I am not the author but Lovable tells me I'm in the top 10% of users. It's a great tool. Not affiliated in any way.

$85,000 in tokens later: What I learned from scaling agentic coding at Lovable

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion (14 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews