I thought vibe coding meant very little direct interaction with the code, mostly telling the LLM what you want and iterating using the LLM. Which is fun and worth trying, but probably not a valid professional tool.
And then, more people saw these critics using "vibe coding" to refer to all LLM code creation, and naturally understood it to mean exactly that. Which means the recent articles we've seen about how good vibe coding starts with a requirements file, then tests that fail, then tests that pass, etc.
Like so many terms that started out being used pejoratively, vibe coding got reclaimed. And it just sounds cool.
Also because we don't really have any other good memorable term for describing code built entirely with LLM's from the ground up, separate from mere autocomplete AI or using LLM's to work on established codebases.
I’m willing to vibe code a spike project. That is to say, I want to see how well some new tool or library works, so I’ll tell the LLM to build a proof of concept, and then I’ll study that and see how I feel about it. Then I throw it away and build the real version with more care and attention.