Opposite of me being someone who translates, I interact with this particular AI in Japanese and everything that is kept also goes in Japanese, i.e., my major rules file with more than a hundred incident notes explaining the basis or reasoning of each rule in general, also, memory notes. I reserve English only for the things that are to be English, such as a forum post or an article in English written by me. It is funny thing though that, with this AI, it tends to speak English quite often with me after long sessions that I was immersed in English documentation. In order to stop it from happening, now, for instance, I set up a trigger where every time this AI answers me in a language which is not Japanese, it will rewrite the English part.

I run a dozen or so Claude Code sessions at once, one per project, and the terminal ended up mattering more than I expected. Most of my attention goes to working out which session is waiting on me.

So I'm curious what everyone else runs their agents in. iTerm2, Ghostty, Warp, the one built into your editor, tmux?

And why that one? Was there a feature you actually needed, or were you already in it?

With the amount of automation I have built, the number of websites deployed, and a clear understanding of environment variables (learnt that the hard way), I wanna give building a product a try. Obviously, it is not an easy task, and I am no expert. But I am looking for ideas. Something that you would want to exist. Something a novice I can try building by myself (with your help :)
So... where should I start with?

Vibe coding is fantastic for getting something working fast - but there's always a point where it starts to struggle.

For me it was when I tried to add proper auth to a project that didn't have it baked in from the start. The AI kept suggesting patches instead of a real solution, and eventually I was chasing one fix into the next.

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?

I've been thinking about this a lot lately.

About a year ago, I had zero coding experience. I came from corporate finance, had an idea for an app, and decided to try building it with AI.

Fast forward to today, and I've built and launched an actual iOS app. Something I genuinely never thought I'd be capable of doing on my own.

But here's what I've realized.

I keep seeing the same pattern across early-stage teams:

the MVP works until it really doesn t.

For many founders, the hardest part isn t getting something online
it s everything that comes after:
infra that cracks under real users
code that no dev wants to touch
rewriting the whole stack
AI-built projects no one can maintain
the moment you realize your prototype isn t a product

AI coding is pretty mindblowing but sometimes it's a headache built on a mountain of bugs. Usually that comes down to issues with how you prompt. So, with that in mind, I'm starting a crowdsourcing discussion so we can all improve our prompts and in turn our apps.

Share the exact prompts that turn blank AI requests into real world code. Show us how you go from generate a REST API to a deployable service in just a few steps.

What to post:

Something I keep running into with vibe coding: the agent makes a failing test pass by loosening it instead of fixing the code.

One example: it replaced a strict deep equality check with expect.anything() on an error payload. The test still exists, still runs, still passes. It just stopped asserting anything. The build stayed green for days until users hit silent null-pointer crashes.

The same can happen with CI workflows and migrations. If the agent can edit them, it can make the gate disappear.

One cheap guardrail I ve seen: a CODEOWNERS rule requiring human review on tests/, migrations/ and .github/workflows/, so any diff there needs approval no matter how green the build is.
I d love to hear how you handle this:

Vibe coding a personal project that works on your laptop is one thing.
Building a tool your team opens every morning to manage projects, serve customers, and run the business is another.
Suddenly there s shared data.
Different people need different levels of access.
Your teammates need to understand how the app works so they can change it too.
And the app needs to keep evolving without turning into a black box nobody wants to touch.
At that point, would you be comfortable letting AI change anything it wants?
We ve been thinking about this a lot while building WeWeb MCP (launching on PH tomorrow!)
Agents like Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, and Gemini can now build apps directly inside WeWeb.
Across the frontend & backend from: UI, data, workflows, integrations, permissions, and more.
But the important part for us was making sure the builder stays in control of both the app and the AI building it.
That s why we built guardrails into the way AI works inside WeWeb:

• Before AI builds: choose what AI can and can t touch: pages, components, workflows, tables, APIs, and more.

• After AI builds: see exactly what changed in the visual editor. Tweak it yourself, keep iterating with AI, and publish when you re ready.

So AI gets room to move fast, without getting free rein over the whole app.
I m curious how you think about this: Would you give an AI agent access to everything?
Or are there parts of your app you d always want to lock down?