His position is less about speed and more about creation. If you didn’t have to shift cursor focus or “delete 3 chars and replace with these other 3 chars” would you represent things directly to the machine like you would to yourself, unbridled by the necessity to serialize these thoughts via the keyboard.

It may be the difference between “Refactor > Extract to parameter” and “Find all uses of function. Replace signature with modified signature, setting new parameter to value desired, using parameter from signature instead of local variable”.

When you are a child, you express yourself by constructing words of letters, then sentences of words. What if we’re at the sentence stage right now and the future is expressing ideas as paragraphs all at once.

That would be a shift akin to macros or HKT in programming languages.

That’s what he’s selling. Not the typing. The typing just hurts immersion a little bit.

I don't know if it's typing speed or not, but dictating a narrative and typing it feel completely different. I type at about 80-90wpm and probably speak at 150-180. That impedance mismatch is enough to block free-flowing thought and cause me to repeat/rewind sentences. I don't know if it's limiting, as the output of typing is usually less verbose, but it takes me longer to get it down.

It's not so much about typing speed for me, more about the physical act of sitting at a computer and coding. If I could think code into existence, then I can code literally anywhere. Laptops are way more portable than desktops, but not nearly portable enough.

I don't exactly agree with the Singularity guy but thinking that typing is the only way to interact with a computer (or network) is very narrow minded