Beyond the Prompt: Is "Vibe Coding" making us better architects or lazier engineers?

The shift toward "Vibe Coding" feels like we’ve finally moved from being construction workers to being conductors. We are spending less time fighting syntax and more time sculpting the "intent" of our software.

However, as I’ve been leaning into this AI-native workflow, I’ve noticed a recurring tension that I’d love to get the community’s take on:

1. The "Black Box" Debt: When we "vibe" our way through a feature in 20 minutes that used to take 4 hours, are we unknowingly inheriting technical debt that will haunt us when the "vibe" inevitably breaks?

2. The Death of the Senior Intuition: We used to build intuition by failing at the low-level stuff. If the AI handles the "how," are we losing the ability to understand the "why" when things scale?

3. The Architect Era: On the flip side, I feel like I’m finally building at the speed of thought. My "Product Sense" is finally the bottleneck, not my typing speed.

My question to the builders here: How are you balancing the high-velocity "vibe" with the need for long-term maintainability? Are you changing how you document code, or are you just "vibing" until it breaks and letting the AI fix it again?

Curious to hear your "vibe coding" horror stories or your biggest productivity wins.