That project was super cool — I loved the shared‑space vibe. Gamifying AI agents so they can play/paint together with humans is something I am addicted to~
As AI continues to transform how we create all kinds of content, Vibe Coding - or more broadly, Vibe Creation - is enabling new ways of working and lifestyles.
Vibe Friends and GeekBang initiated this survey at the end of 2025 to capture a real snapshot of China's Vibe ecosystem this year. We also hope to continue this survey over the coming years to document how Vibe creation and its ecosystem evolve.
No matter your profession, role, age, or work status, as long as you use AI for Vibe creation, you are welcome to join this survey - your voice matters.
> In my work, the bigger bottleneck to productivity is that very few people can correctly articulate requirements.
Totally agree. I’ve tried to explain this in many places: AI coding (and creative tools in general) will ultimately remain tools. Only people who can clearly and thoughtfully articulate requirements will be able to fully leverage them.
Another hot take: the “one-person company.” Headcount isn’t the key variable. With AI, the real constraint is how well you can understand a problem and clearly define a solution.
- If a problem can be clearly defined and fully understood by one person, then one person is enough to solve it.
- If a problem is more complex and requires two fundamentally different areas of expertise, then it will likely take two capable people to solve it—no more, no less.
Anyone can post an idea for something they wish existed — an app, a game, a tool, or anything else — and share it.
When more people back an idea, it gains momentum and starts getting built, either by AI or by community makers. The goal is to turn crowd energy into real progress.
Knowledge isn’t knowledge in itself — it’s about how people organize it.
With more AI tools mining existing knowledge and presenting it in increasingly accessible ways, I don’t think AI search fundamentally changes how information and knowledge are organized.
Of course, AI could reshape the organization of knowledge through areas like:
1. Fact-checking and sourcing
2. Drafting new pages
3. Editing and refining wording
…and more
---
Just like Wikipedia already has many bots running behind the scenes, if all these tasks were eventually handled by AI, there would still be things left for humans (or perhaps another AI) to decide:
1. When a fact has multiple perspectives, how should it be phrased to represent different viewpoints fairly?
> I still remember countless word battles on Wikipedia over this.
2. In the age of smartphones and social media, historical moments are documented not only by journalists or influencers but by thousands — even millions — of ordinary people. How should Wikipedia process and summarize such vast, distributed facts?
3. How do we properly incentivize contributors, whether human or AI?
> Wikipedia was born in an era when the Internet lacked reliable information, and building a shared, sustainable, independent knowledge base was a mission that resonated with its early contributors — traffic rewards came later.
4. And of course, geopolitics — Wikipedia must remain independent.
---
A bit of background: I once led a Chinese wiki product, but I eventually gave up on it — because almost no one cared why a wiki should exist beyond being just another searchable content platform.
Looks great! I truly believe that mobile and scrolling addiction are causing people to disengage, especially those who value the real world, real people, and genuine human connections.
AI is undeniably empowering and accelerating almost everything—faster, faster, faster. But what comes next for us, as regular human beings?
Still, grounding ourselves in nature—touching grass, watching sunsets, hiking, cycling—remains essential to our well-being.
That project was super cool — I loved the shared‑space vibe. Gamifying AI agents so they can play/paint together with humans is something I am addicted to~