The point not to YOLO in vibe coded slop. It's that with agentic generation you can prove out concepts, features and technical approaches first because it's low cost. Once you have something working you can work on getting alignment.
And yes you should completely grok what you're finally committing, making sure it's fully tested. What it enables is lots of fast experimentation before settling on your final change.
Or you can have a conversation with an agent to build up a requirements/plan spec, asking it to analyse existing code patterns. When it seems like the agent has a good understanding of what needs to be done and how. Ask it to implement, keeping changes as a local spike.
Ask the agent questions about all the other teams' code, reaching out to them for questions it can't answer or clarification. With agent capabilities atm this is rare or can be done fairly async: "please confirm these things".
Maybe realise your code architecture is completely wrong. Manually code up some new abstractions that fit better, write the learnings into the spec plan. Strip out any implementation that largely doesn't fit your updated abstractions. Ask the agent to migrate the code to the new structure.
Repeat until spike is operational and you're happy with the abstractions used
Chat with the agent to create a Design Doc for the approach in the spike. Create a single JIRA ticket for "Productionise CodeShmode's spike". Get reviews and feedback from stakeholders.
Integrate feedback into your spike, or even the original spec document and regenerate the whole thing.
So much of the ritual you've outlined here is overhead from working in a large org where roles are siloed. When one person is empowered to do more then the actual work per person goes down and the overhead becomes the dominant. But that overhead isn't needed anymore because one person can now do many people's work.
I've whipped up spikes in a few days that would've been a month of work across a team multiple DDs and approvals. In the past this wasn't feasible so we would need to justify what those people would work on. Now you can whip it up, show a working demo and ask "should we productionise this"
The timer would not need to be onboard the spinning flywheel, it could be on an observing quasite orbiting higher. When it's time to launch it could shine a control laser at the flywheel, which is used to time the triggering of a cutting laser at the right position to slice the payload off at the correct angle.
One timer could be used to launch multiple flywheel payloads over time
> Decades of constant failure from supposedly elite people in every possible field have lead to a reaction where people just don’t trust them no matter what they claim.
That’s a big claim to make without offering any examples.
I guess the argument would be that it has a greater impact on the profitability of intermittent energy sources as it can stabilize the grid by soaking up cheap off-peak power. Not sure if I buy it either.
And yes you should completely grok what you're finally committing, making sure it's fully tested. What it enables is lots of fast experimentation before settling on your final change.
https://www.google.com/search?q=software+spike