For most of modern software history, respect was earned the same way: grind.
You earned your stripes by reading the whole codebase. By tracing every branch. By stepping through call stacks until your eyes blurred. By fixing the bug no one else could fix, because you were the one willing to do the manual work. The craft rewarded endurance, attention, and the ability to hold a thousand details in your head without flinching.
And to be clear—those skills still matter.
But the ground has shifted.
We’re entering a world where “manual effort” is no longer the best proxy for competence. Not because hard work stopped being valuable, but because the cost of brute force just became unjustifiable when you have tools that can scan, summarize, map, and pattern-match at superhuman speed.
So what’s the new edge?
It’s not typing speed.
It’s not how much pain you can tolerate.
It’s not who can read the most code the longest.
The edge is now acuity and sagacity
Hours delivered back to the business
SOX compliance in Settlement process automation
Success rate of bot case completion
For functional release of OBT, RTS and OGS
The Old Game: Brute Force as Virtue
Developers have always had a kind of moral pride around suffering.
“I stayed up all night.”
“I read every file.”
“I didn’t trust anyone else.”
“I debugged it manually.”
“I don’t use shortcuts.”
We built a culture where effort was confused with excellence. Where “doing it the hard way” became a badge of honor. And in the pre-AI world, that wasn’t completely irrational—because the hard way was often the only way.
If you wanted to understand a system, you had to read it. If you wanted to find a bug, you had to chase it. If you wanted to refactor, you had to build a mental model from scratch.
That grind shaped us. It made us sharp. It made us disciplined.
But it also created a trap: we started defining competence as the ability to do things the slow way.
The New Reality: AI Removes the “Reading Tax”
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: a huge percentage of development time has always been the “reading tax.”
- scanning files to find where logic lives
- tracing flows across layers
- identifying patterns and repeated code
- mapping dependencies
- searching for relevant examples
- comparing implementations
- spotting inconsistencies
That work is important. It’s foundational. It’s also exhausting.
And now, AI is simply better at that specific category of work than humans, in the same way a calculator is better at arithmetic. Not because humans are incapable, but because the machine doesn’t fatigue, doesn’t lose attention, and can ingest far more context than a person can hold at once.
AI can read what you can’t reasonably read at speed.
So the question becomes:
If the “reading tax” is no longer the bottleneck, what is?
The bottleneck is now judgment.
Acuity: Seeing What Matters
Acuity is clarity of perception.
In code, acuity is the ability to look at a messy system and quickly identify:
- what is core vs incidental
- what is stable vs fragile
- where the true complexity lives
- which module is the “source of truth”
- which parts are risk magnets
- which changes will cascade
- what constraints are real vs imagined
A developer with acuity doesn’t get hypnotized by noise. They don’t confuse “large” with “important.” They don’t mistake busywork for progress.
They see the system like a map.
AI can help you generate the map.
Acuity is knowing where to place your feet.
Sagacity: Choosing Wisely Under Uncertainty
Sagacity is practical wisdom—the ability to make good decisions with imperfect information.
In development, sagacity shows up as:
- knowing which trade-offs are worth it
- when to refactor vs patch
- when to ship now vs hold the line
- when to simplify vs generalize
- when to follow best practice vs break it
- when AI is right vs confidently wrong
- when your instincts are ego vs truth
This is the part people underestimate.
Because AI can sound convincing.
It can produce clean code. It can give crisp explanations. It can propose elegant architectures. It can even be correct—often.
But it cannot carry responsibility.
It does not suffer the consequences of a bad abstraction. It doesn’t get paged at 3 a.m. It doesn’t face the customer. It doesn’t feel the weight of “we’re betting the sprint on this decision.”
That’s still human territory.
That’s sagacity.
The Biggest Lie Developers Tell Themselves
A lot of developers think:
“If I use AI, I’m not really doing the work.”
But that’s like saying:
“If I use a debugger, I’m not really debugging.”
“If I use search, I’m not really coding.”
“If I use libraries, I’m not really engineering.”
“If I use a compiler, I’m not really writing software.”
Tools don’t cheapen skill. They change what skill is.
The real danger isn’t using AI.
The danger is using AI without judgment—treating it like an oracle instead of a power tool.
And that’s exactly why acuity and sagacity are the new differentiators.
The New Definition of “Senior”
In the old world, “senior” often meant:
“I can do more things manually without help.”
In the new world, “senior” increasingly means:
“I can decide the right thing to do.”
A senior developer is someone who:
- asks better questions than they answer
- reduces complexity instead of adding it
- identifies the one change that solves three problems
- foresees second-order effects
- builds guardrails for the team
- can read AI output and instantly smell what’s missing
- knows where the bodies are buried in a codebase
- understands people, incentives, and systems—not just syntax
AI can produce output.
Seniors produce outcomes.
“But I Don’t Trust AI”
You shouldn’t.
At least not blindly.
You also shouldn’t trust:
- your first instinct
- your memory
- a single StackOverflow answer
- a random blog post
- an unreviewed PR
- a “works on my machine” test
Software has always been about verification.
The move isn’t to “trust AI.”
The move is to use AI for acceleration and reserve your effort for validation and judgment.
AI can propose.
You decide.
AI can summarize.
You verify.
AI can generate.
You review.
AI can map the repo.
You choose the strategy.
That’s the point.
Practical Ways to Build Acuity and Sagacity (With AI)
Here’s a simple approach that works:
1) Use AI to compress the search space
Ask it:
- “Where is the logic for X likely implemented?”
- “Summarize the flow from API endpoint to DB write.”
- “List the top 10 files that influence this behavior.”
- “What are the most suspicious spots for this bug?”
This saves time, not responsibility.
2) Force it to show its work
Ask:
- “Cite the files and lines that led you to this conclusion.”
- “What assumptions are you making?”
- “What’s the counterexample?”
- “What would disprove this hypothesis?”
This turns AI from storyteller into analyst.
3) Keep your job: reasoning about trade-offs
You handle:
- scope boundaries
- acceptable risk
- architecture direction
- team constraints
- long-term maintainability
- correctness thresholds
- “what happens in prod?” thinking
Acuity and sagacity live here.
The Point: Don’t Be Proud of Suffering
This is the shift I’m seeing in real time:
It’s no longer about proving you can read every long file, trace every branch by hand, and grind through the manual analysis yourself.
The edge is acuity and sagacity:
Acuity to see what actually matters in the codebase through all the noise.
Sagacity to let AI do the heavy lifting while you make the judgment calls that decide the outcome.
AI can read the long lines.
Your job is to see the signal, choose the move, and own the consequences.
That’s the new craft.
The Results
- Faster comprehension of complex codebases without sacrificing correctness
- Reduced cognitive load by eliminating manual “reading tax” workflows
- Higher-quality architectural and technical decisions under uncertainty
-
Improved ability to identify true risk, core logic, and system constraints
- More confident use of AI as an accelerator — not a replacement for judgment
