I think there's a compounding effect too with multiple people working on the same thing with AI since the AI is only as good as your prompt. Having another member of the team to use AI to review, cross-examine intent, or optimize your diff is 40x if you both 20x.
Diminishing returns though, a 3rd person in the mix probably creates more noise with a committee effect... so what used to be teams of many can pare down to teams of 2.
Something we've been trying that seems to go well is jumping on a screen share, and tag-teaming planning mode. With AI writing the doc and us both in real-time it can be comprehensive scope with great detail really fast. One then executes the build-from-doc and reviews the result, the other cross-examines. The more detailed docs may be a bigger efficiency gain than with code.
Diverse tool/model preferences catch things we might not otherwise too, up to and including re-do of anything done with free Antigravity tokens.
I think there's a compounding effect too with multiple people working on the same thing with AI since the AI is only as good as your prompt. Having another member of the team to use AI to review, cross-examine intent, or optimize your diff is 40x if you both 20x.
Diminishing returns though, a 3rd person in the mix probably creates more noise with a committee effect... so what used to be teams of many can pare down to teams of 2.
Something we've been trying that seems to go well is jumping on a screen share, and tag-teaming planning mode. With AI writing the doc and us both in real-time it can be comprehensive scope with great detail really fast. One then executes the build-from-doc and reviews the result, the other cross-examines. The more detailed docs may be a bigger efficiency gain than with code.
Diverse tool/model preferences catch things we might not otherwise too, up to and including re-do of anything done with free Antigravity tokens.