Local Code is built on a simple, aggressive premise:
The next order-of-magnitude gains in software creation will not come from simply bigger models alone, but from fully exploiting the three scale-up axes identified in the situational awareness literature:
1. Compute & Algorithmic Efficiency Are Becoming Commodities
We treat the first two axes as inevitable background forces: larger compute budgets and continuous algorithmic improvement are baseline drivers. As the essay states:
“We can put them on a unified scale of growing effective compute… 3× is 0.5 OOMs… 100× is 2 OOMs.”
Compute prices will fall, algorithmic efficiency will compound, and effective compute will grow in successive orders-of-magnitude (OOM) steps. Local Code assumes these curves persist, compressing the cost of cognition for software creation.
2. The Real Arbitrage Is Unhobbling Gains
The third axis “unhobbling” is where the real multiplier lies. As the essay notes:
“By default, models learn a lot of amazing raw capabilities, but they are hobbled… RLHF, chain-of-thought, tools, and scaffolding unlock significant latent capabilities.”
This is the frontier. Chain-of-thought prompting (CoT), parse-by-parse reasoning, RLHF for long-horizon behaviors, tool-use scaffolds, desktop agents, and broader agentic browser work all represent large latent multipliers without requiring brand-new models. The shift from “chatbot” to “agent” is precisely such an unhobbling leap.
3. Local Code Captures the Unhobbling Layer
Most AI dev-tools chase incremental UX improvements or model wrappers. Local Code instead is designed to weaponize latent capability at the system-level: chain-of-thought execution, tool-driven reasoning, persistent memory, parallel agents, system-level situational awareness, and full-stack control loops. While compute and algorithms improve, Local Code sits above and multiplies them. We are not waiting for the next generational model: we exploit what’s already latent.
4. Strategic Mandate
By 2027 we can expect stacked OOMs across all three axes—compute, algorithmic efficiency, and unhobbling. The platform that channels those OOMs into real autonomy becomes the dominant compounding engine for software creation. Local Code intends to be that engine—the IDE where compute curves, algorithmic efficiency, and unhobbling effects converge into maximal automation. This is how we build a tool that makes individual developers 10×, 100×, eventually 1000× more economically productive.
5. Founder Context
As recognized early, the leverage is not in writing code faster; it’s in orchestrating machine cognition and tool-use at scale. Local Code operationalizes that philosophy. We build for world-defining impact: tools building tools for compounding output. Our goal: launch to the public by early December 2025, reach our target user base, and turn Local Code into the core automation stack for the next generation of productive computer use.
References
Aschenbrenner, L. (June 2024). Situational Awareness: The Decade Ahead. https://situational-awareness.ai/
Aschenbrenner, L. (1.5 years ago). From GPT-4 to AGI: Counting the OOMs. https://situational-awareness.ai/from-gpt-4-to-agi/
OpenAI. (2022). Scaling laws for neural language models. https://openai.com/index/scaling-laws-for-neural-language-models/
Hoffmann, J., Borgeaud, S., Mensch, A., et al. (2022 Mar). Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.15556
Zhan, Q., et al. (2024). Removing RLHF Protections in GPT-4 via Fine-Tuning. NAACL Short. https://aclanthology.org/2024.naacl-short.59.pdf
Lee, H., et al. (2024). RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback. https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mlresearch/v235/main/assets/lee24t/lee24t.pdf
Greyling, C. (2023). Chain-of-Thought Prompting & LLM Reasoning. https://cobusgreyling.medium.com/chain-of-thought-prompting-llm-reasoning-147a6cdb312c
IBM. (n.d.). What is Chain of Thought (CoT) Prompting? https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/chain-of-thoughts
Yao, S., Zhao, J., Yu, D., et al. (2022 Oct). ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03629
Grootendorst, M. (2025 Mar 17). A Visual Guide to LLM Agents. https://newsletter.maartengrootendorst.com/p/a-visual-guide-to-llm-agents
PromptingGuide.ai. (n.d.). LLM Agents. https://www.promptingguide.ai/research/llm-agents
Song, J., et al. (2025 Jun 12). Build the Web for Agents, not Agents for the Web. https://arxiv.org/html/2506.10953v1
a16z. (2025 Aug 28). The Rise of Computer Use and Agentic Coworkers. https://a16z.com/the-rise-of-computer-use-and-agentic-coworkers/
Reuters. (2025 Oct 18). Meta releases AI model that can check other AI models’ work. https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/meta-releases-ai-model-that-can-check-other-ai-models-work-2024-10-18/
Wired/Verge. (2025). Google’s latest AI model uses a web browser like you do. https://www.theverge.com/news/795463/google-computer-use-gemini-ai-model-agents
Abdaljalil, S., Kurban, H., Qaraqe, K., Serpedin, E. (2025 Jun 8). Theorem-of-Thought: A Multi-Agent Framework for Abductive, Deductive, and Inductive Reasoning in Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.07106
Zhao, J., Xie, H., Lei, Y., et al. (2025 May 16). Connecting the Dots: A Chain-of-Collaboration Prompting Framework for LLM Agents. https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.10936
Liu, H., Teng, Z., Zhang, C., Zhang, Y. (2024). Logic Agent: Enhancing Validity with Logic Rule Invocation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.18130
Shoeybi, M., Patwary, M., Puri, R., et al. (2019). Megatron-LM: Training Multi-Billion Parameter Language Models Using Model Parallelism. https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.08053