We examine the gap between creators and consumers, highlighting AI’s role in empowering developers and non-developers while questioning universal coding adoption.

Lately, LinkedIn, X, and other platforms are abuzz with “vibe coding and building agents.” With AI-powered IDEs like Cursor or Windsurf, or Low/No Code platforms like Bolt, Loveable, and Replit, it seems like anyone—and their grandma—can spin up an app over the weekend.

And sure, the demos are slick. The optimism is contagious. But then I paused: is this real? I introspected my own habits—I am more of a Consumer, not a Creator, and so are most people!

I looked at YouTube—arguably the simplest content creation platform around. Less than 2.5% of users actually upload videos. Everyone can create, but most don’t. Not because the tools are hard, but because creation itself takes effort, clarity, and motivation.

I researched both YouTube and LinkedIn in terms of time to create, and I think creating an app is as time-consuming, if not more, than creating a video.

So, it begs the question: do we really expect everyone to be coding in the future?

Let’s be a bit more realistic.

For developers, AI is a productivity multiplier—it writes boilerplate code, helps with debugging, suggests architecture, and even explains unfamiliar codebases. It’s like pair programming with a tireless assistant. (I am one of them!)

For non-developers, AI is an enabler—it can turn a messy idea into a working prototype, help generate content, automate repetitive workflows, or answer questions without needing to know how to code.

WDYT?

Everyone won’t become a coder—and shouldn’t—and that’s okay!

#aimusings #vibecoding #AIAgents

Creators vs Consumers statistics time taken