The slot machine analogy is apt — the variable reward schedule of "sometimes it works perfectly, sometimes it generates nonsense" creates exactly the compulsive checking behavior described. But I think the addiction framing points to something structurally important beyond the psychological hook.
The deeper problem with slot-machine vibe coding is what happens to the codebase over time. Each "spin" produces output without accountability for whether it fits the broader system design. You get dopamine hits from features that appear to work, but accumulated inconsistency, undocumented assumptions, and untraceable decisions pile up below the surface.
This is why the Agile Vibe Coding Manifesto emphasizes "traceable intent over opaque implementation" as a core value — not just for code quality, but because without it you can't distinguish a genuine win from a lucky spin. When every change is opaque, you're always gambling even when you feel like you're in control.
Relevant for anyone trying to build sustainable workflows with AI-assisted development: https://agilevibecoding.org
The deeper problem with slot-machine vibe coding is what happens to the codebase over time. Each "spin" produces output without accountability for whether it fits the broader system design. You get dopamine hits from features that appear to work, but accumulated inconsistency, undocumented assumptions, and untraceable decisions pile up below the surface.
This is why the Agile Vibe Coding Manifesto emphasizes "traceable intent over opaque implementation" as a core value — not just for code quality, but because without it you can't distinguish a genuine win from a lucky spin. When every change is opaque, you're always gambling even when you feel like you're in control.
Relevant for anyone trying to build sustainable workflows with AI-assisted development: https://agilevibecoding.org