[dolebirchwood]

I accept there are productivity gains, but it's hard to take "10x" seriously. It's such a tired trope. Is no one humble enough to be a meager 2.5x engineer?

[signatoremo]

10x probably means “substantial gain”. There is no universal unit of gain.

However if the difference is between doing a project vs not doing is, then the gain is much more than 10x.

[bpodgursky]

I don't know what to tell you, it's just true. I have done what was previously days of BI/SQL dredging and visualizing in 20 minutes. You can be shocked and skeptical but it doesn't make it not true.

[isodev]

There is no x is because LLM performance is non deterministic. You get slop out at varying degrees of quality and so your job shifts from writing to debugging.

[llmslave2]

Even 2.5x is absurd. If they said 1.5x I might believe them.

[OsrsNeedsf2P]

I'm building an AI agent for Godot, and in paid user testing we found the median speed up time to complete a variety of tasks[0] was 2x. This number was closer to 10x for less experienced engineers

[0] tasks included making games from scratch and resolving bugs we put into template projects. There's no perfect tasks to test on, but this seemed sufficient

[thornewolf]

I estimated that i was 1.2x when we only had tab completion models. 1.5x would be too modest. I've done plenty of ~6-8 hour tasks in ~1-2 hours using llms.

[kmoser]

I recently used AI to help build the majority of a small project (database-driven website with search and admin capabilities) and I'd confidently say I was able to build it 3 to 5 times faster with AI. For context, I'm an experienced developer and know how to tweak the AI code when it's wonky and the AI can't be coerced into fixing its mistakes.