[kjqgqkejbfefn]

Speed up gains in development are not just a matter of how fast a coder can achieve a task compared to another worker, but how a certain choice of architecture can enable these gains to be collected again in the future for anyone working on this codebase. If you managed to make a certain task completable 10 times faster and this task will be repeated n times in the future (for instance implementing an API route on a server), you end up with a "complexity" of n versus 10n. Of course it requires making code investments and these decisions should be made by assessing whether it is worth it with respect to n (whether YAGNI). The true "10x" improvements are to be found in the compilers and frameworks you use, now the question is whether your 0.1x colleagues would be comfortable working with tools whose implementation overwhelms them but still allow them to get a 10x speedup.

[Phiwise_]

Again, my understanding is that the 10x study was done on reviewed devs writing necessary and best-practice code in a cooperative setting with the same tooling, so this is still irrelevant to discussing the topic. Of course no one who wants to encourage velocity thinks you shouldn't invest in tooling that will automate long tasks for you. We should learn and cheat. My irritation is with suggestions that there's nothing serious to learn, not that I think there's nothing to cheat on, which is an unconnected topic anyway.