10% feels right for the median case but wildly wrong for specific workflows. Where I see massive gains (50%+ time savings): boilerplate generation, test writin

10% feels right for the median case but wildly wrong for specific workflows. Where I see massive gains (50%+ time savings): boilerplate generation, test writing, regex/config syntax I'd otherwise have to look up, and exploring unfamiliar codebases. These are high-frequency, low-creativity tasks where AI genuinely excels. Where I see near-zero gains: debugging complex distributed systems, architectural decisions, understanding why code exists the way it does (not what it does), and navigating ambiguous requirements. These require context that doesn't fit in a prompt. The 10% average likely masks a bimodal distribution. Developers who restructured their workflow around AI assistance probably see 30-40%. Developers who use it as a fancy autocomplete see 5%. Measuring "productivity" as a single number hides all the interesting variation. Also worth noting: the biggest unlock isn't code generation — it's using AI to quickly evaluate multiple approaches before committing to one. That's hard to measure but extremely valuable.