Live data from Hacker News

2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

obryant.dev

91–100 of 260 posts

Re: 2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

#91
post #89
post #26

You still have to know what you’re doing. That came from years of doing it by hand. Where is that necessary experience going to come from for the current and future generations of juniors?

In 10 years llms will handle it all from start to finish.

We have passed peak LLM already. In 10 years, something might be handling "it all" from start to finish, but it won't be LLMs.

Re: 2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

#92

While I agree with the premise, I think this angle only applies on work one was going to do no matter what. The real power of these tools is that there are so many ideas people would like to try, but never have the time or motivation to pursue. So the comparison is not only "built with and without LLM" but "would you even build this if you didn't have the LLM?". The gap in productivity in this case is much more wide.

> The real power of these tools is that there are so many ideas people would like to try, but never have the time or motivation to pursue. This can be a negative multiplier: code I thought I wanted that gets immediately abandoned is a net-negative if no one else wants it (lets face it, this is the safest default posture for software of unknown providence). In isolation, instant-abandonware takes up hdd space, burns d…

Not every engineering effort is a product in search of market fit or a community.

Some things are already very useful as just a one shot. I just made a quick app to help me pack for a trip, it updated forecasts every day, let me know when rain entered the forecast at one of my stops and gave me a checklist that helped me quell my travel anxiety.

The greatest thing that LLMs have done is allow many to achieve things that they couldn't have before. I'm incredibly disinterested in "I can do the same thing I was already doing x% faster"

Re: 2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

#93
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quality of my bash scripts is 100x what they used to be. Proper help messages, flag parsing, functions, internal variables, using sed all the time (I could never wrap my head around that). Of course, the main issue is that they’re completely undebbugable now. My bash scripts used to be a sequential list of commands, now they’re 500 lines of variable laden functions. Is my life any better? Dunno. But it’s satisfyi…

> the main issue is that they’re completely undebbugable now Well, that means the quality actually dropped then :). Looking impressive isn't equal to quality, understandability and reliability is

100x UX quality, not DX quality.

Re: 2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

#94
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> allows me to do things not only faster, but better, and across domains I do not hold expertise on. How would you know it's better when you have no expertise?

Because it produces the desired output. The purpose of a program. There are many domains where an intelligent human can act as a discriminator for output without knowing exactly in precise detail how the process itself works.

That is certainly true, but there are also many cases where someone without core expertise who believes themselves to be a capable discriminator actually is not.

Re: 2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

#95
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI is great because my job is a lot easier, but it produces some extremely crappy code that would've NEVER passed a code review 1 year ago. You could argue that it speeds up development by 5X or more, but then it slows down testing/verifying, code review, and in many cases it makes it impossible to review/rework by hand. I just do what I'm told at work but even though I'm sure I'm in the minority I'm extremely skepti…

> it produces some extremely crappy code that would've NEVER passed a code review 1 year ago The 10x speed up comes from the fact that we have all given up on properly reviewing each others code and we just say “meh, it will be fine, lgtm”

Yes, exactly my point.

BUT, to me if we hadn't lowered the bar MASSIVELY, it would NOT be fine.

I've seen people at my work that will push or even deploy features that don't do what their main purpose is and they just dismiss the issue saying it's a bug. As an example, a button that's supposed to open a modal window if you click on it. If you go test it and the modal doesn't open, they'll say "oh, there's a bug".

You developed or even deployed something that is wrong and completely useless. Just one year ago, this would be unheard of and you would've gotten a really hard time for it. Now it's just a bug and part of how we're doing things.

Like I said, I just do what I'm told at work but to me this is just wild. There's no way it won't come back to bite us.

Re: 2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

#96
post #82

While I agree with the premise, I think this angle only applies on work one was going to do no matter what. The real power of these tools is that there are so many ideas people would like to try, but never have the time or motivation to pursue. So the comparison is not only "built with and without LLM" but "would you even build this if you didn't have the LLM?". The gap in productivity in this case is much more wide.

I think the ideas worth pursuing still require substantial time and motivation, even with LLMs. Otherwise you just end up with a half-baked sloppy artifact that nobody will ever use or study, for a net negative benefit to humanity.

Well, I’m happy just to make half baked slop for myself. Highly personalized software that is poorly implemented and yet yields the result I desire.

E.g. software that generates these models that I can print

https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2026-06-30/Modeling_a_W...

https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2025-12-01/Grounding_Yo...

Or blog post authoring software

https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2026-04-25/The_rise_of_...

There were so many things that no one will ever study and won’t give humanity any benefit but I use everyday to make my life better. That’s enough. The value far exceeds $200/mo. I’m getting it for cheap and now that I have my GPUs and my models they can’t even take it from me in the future if they wanted, haha!

LLMs allow for human flourishing on a massive scale. One of the best inventions to occur in my life. Up there with the Internet/Web. Truly a marvelous time.

Re: 2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

#98
post #23

This is a dated take to me. I think the next stage in unlocking productivity is so called "loop engineering"; figuring out how to effectively not read all the code while ensuring quality. To me that means implementing statistical quality control and formal methods. Before I get there I have to figure out how to reliably audit plan adherence. The problem is that when the specs are in natural language, as they are, you…

We built a conversational terraform platform at work, you describe what you need for your infra and it produces the terraform code following company standards and rules. What is important for us is the LLM never writes any code. It just extracts a structured spec from the conversation, and a deterministic engine (plain python, no LLM) renders the code from approved modules only. So there is no "code quality" discussion at all, and since the spec is structured and not natural language, you don't need another LLM to verify it, the risk moves to the extraction step which is small and easy to eval. But probably this only works in narrow domains where the output is composable from approved blocks (IaC, config etc), and its not a new idea, just old discipline behind a chat interface. But in that slice the speedup is way beyond 2x.

Re: 2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

#99
yeah i can't say if it's 2x or 10x or 100x i don't know. i just know i barely open vim anymore. I still find my rate of development is limited by how much my single mind can hold at any given time. I am however accomplishing with a much higher rate of confidence many many more daily tasks usually by 10am... the limit is usually my willingness to imagine and think critically about an idea with enough clarity to result in something that make sense. It's a different energy then normal development but similar enough.

Re: 2x, not 10x: coding with LLMs in 2026

#100

While I agree with the premise, I think this angle only applies on work one was going to do no matter what. The real power of these tools is that there are so many ideas people would like to try, but never have the time or motivation to pursue. So the comparison is not only "built with and without LLM" but "would you even build this if you didn't have the LLM?". The gap in productivity in this case is much more wide.

LLMs open up huge possibilities to do work that you otherwise wouldn't do. I vibe coded a PDF viewer yesterday in a couple of hours using Claude and Grok. I've been itching for a native Mac app that meets some very basic requirements: one window with file tree on the left and tabbed view on the right, with the ability to call out to pdfgrep and jump to results. Like Zotero, but with better multi-file search and a viewer that doesn't choke on big files. Claude built it for me in an hour, and Grok iterated a couple of times to make it better. I didn't look at a single line of code. It's now my default PDF viewer, and I used it today to do a bunch of my real work.

It's a braindead simple program that mostly hooks together pre-existing functionality, it just so happened that none of the widely available apps had the specific mix of features I wanted. I could probably have done it myself in a week if I took time off my non-coding day job to figure out Swift and AppKit. But I wasn't going to do that. I’m psyched. I hate web apps and now I can just write my own for all the little things I use every day.

Post reply on HN