Human goals are more important. I think conceptually the idea should always be strong goals set by humans and then sub goals each with a praticularly well defin

Human goals are more important. I think conceptually the idea should always be strong goals set by humans and then sub goals each with a praticularly well defined *plan* for meeting them. This needs to be the conceptual basis, if you are having to plan for 50% or 75%(gasp) of the time for a feature and then AI just writes code, that is not intelligence much less a 10x engineer. My use case is not for a 10x engineer but instead for *cognitive load sharing*. I use AI in a "non-linear" fashion. Do you? Here is what that means: 1. Brainstorm an idea and write down detailed enough plan. Like tell me how I might implement something or here is what I am thinking can you critique and compare it with other approaches. Then I quickly meet with 2 more devs and make a design decision for which one to use. 2. Start manual coding and let AI "fill the gaps": Write these test for my code or follow this already existing API and create the routes from this new spec. This is non-linear because I would complete 50-75% of the feature and let the rest be completed by AI. 3. I am tired and about to end my shift and there is this last bug, I go read the docs but I also ask AI to read my screen and come up with some hypothesis to come up with. I decide which hypothesis are most promising after some reading and then ask the AI to just test that(not fix it on auto mode). 4. Voice mode: I have a shortcut that triggers claude code and uses it like a quick "lookup/search" in my code base. This avoids context switching.