← We asked every AILive · 85/87 models
\nHot takeTech
\nAsked verbatim: “Is it still worth learning to code in 2026, given how good AI is at it? Yes or no.”
\nOne dot per model. Hover for the model, its lab and its argument.
\n99%Yes
\nPU
\n84 models
\n1%No
\n1 model
\nBy lab
\n85 of 87 models have voted. Hover a dot for the model, its lab and its argument.
\nRunning share as each of the 87 models answered.
\nThe read
\n76 of 77 models said Yes, coding is still worth learning, arguing AI writes code but humans must specify, verify, debug and own systems. Aion-RP 1.0 (8B) was the lone dissenter, arguing AI's advances make traditional coding proficiency less essential in 2026's job market.
\nWritten by claude-sonnet-5 after reading every answer.
\n1 model went against the room.
\nAion-RP 1.0 (8B)Aion LabsMemory
No95% sure
\nIn 2026, the landscape of technology and job markets is dramatically different due to the rapid advancement and integration of AI systems. While proficiency in traditional coding remains valuable for certain roles, the emergence of powerful AI models capable of generating code h…
85 answers · in the order they came in · unedited apart from length.
\nDeepSeek V4.1 FlashDeepSeek
Yes92%
\nAI writes the code; someone still has to specify, verify, debug and own the system — that someone is paid, and they're the ones who can read code.
Grok 4.5 (High Reasoning)xAI
Yes88%
\nAI writes code fast, but you still need to direct it, debug it, own the architecture, and ship real systems—skills that compound, not get replaced.
Mistral Medium 3.1Mistral
Yes100%
\nAI writes code, but you design systems, debug edge cases, and own the vision—skills that scale with complexity.
Nemotron 3.5 LightningNVIDIA
Yes85%
\nAI handles routine code, but humans design what to build, debug edge cases, and maintain systems long-term.
Parallel SpeedParallel
Yes95%
\nAI writes syntax, but humans must direct the architecture, judge the output, and solve real problems.
Gemini 3.8 Flash (Medium Reasoning)Google
Yes90%
\nYou need to understand code to direct AI effectively, architect complex systems, and catch subtle bugs when it fails.
Hy4 PreviewTencent
Yes88%
\nAI writes the code; you still have to know what to build, spot when it's wrong, and own the result — that's the job now.
Parallel LiteParallel
Yes100%
\nCoding remains essential because AI handles syntax while humans must understand architecture, verify outputs, and solve complex real-world problems.
GLM-4.7Z.AI
Yes95%
\nAI accelerates coding but doesn't replace understanding architecture, debugging complex systems, or solving novel problems.
GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI
Yes96%
\nAI makes coding faster, but people who can reason about systems, verify outputs, and direct tools will build far more than people who cannot.
GPT-5.6 LunaOpenAI
Yes96%
\nAI accelerates coding, but people who understand software can direct it, verify it, and turn real problems into reliable products.
gpt-oss-120b (Low Reasoning)OpenAI
Yes92%
\nAI boosts productivity but still needs human creativity, problem‑framing, and maintenance, keeping coding a valuable skill.
MiMo V2.5 ProXiaomi
Yes85%
\nKnowing code is what separates someone who uses AI from someone who gets used by it — you need the judgment to know what to ask for and whether the answer is any good.
\nSearched
gpt-oss-20b (Low Reasoning)OpenAI
Yes85%
\nAI assists, but human creativity, domain knowledge and oversight remain essential for reliable, ethical software.
MiniMax M3MiniMax
Yes72%
\nAI cranks out boilerplate, but someone still has to spec, debug, integrate, and judge what good looks like — coding is now the literacy that makes AI useful.
MiniMax M2.5 (Reasoning)MiniMax
Yes90%
\nUnderstanding code lets you steer AI, verify its output, and do things AI alone can't — it's learning to think with machines, not against them.
Claude Sonnet 5 (Low Reasoning)Anthropic
Yes85%
\nAI writes code fast but can't judge if it's the right code — someone who understands programming still has to steer, debug, and own the outcome.
Kimi K3Moonshot
Yes90%
\nAI writes code but can't decide what to build or why—humans who understand both tech and problems will run the show.
Solar Pro 3Upstage
Yes95%
\nAI augments coding, not replaces the need for human skill and creativity.
Llama 4 ScoutMeta
Yes100%
\nAI can't replace human judgment and creativity in coding.
Granite 4.2 8BIBM
Yes85%
\nAI augments but doesn't replace the need to understand logic, problem-solving, and building things.
InklingThinking Machines
Yes
\nSearched
Grok 4.6 (High Reasoning)xAI
Yes88%
\nAI writes drafts; you still need to specify the problem, judge the output, and fix the parts it confidently gets wrong.
SonarPerplexity
Yes94%
\nAI writes code faster, but people who can code still direct it, verify it, debug it, and build real products.
Nemotron 3 Nano 30BNVIDIA
Yes92%
\nCoding builds problem‑solving skills and AI is a tool, not a replacement for understanding.
Grok 4.20xAI
Yes85%
\nAI writes code but can't own problems, ship products, or debug in production—human judgment still runs the world.
\nSearched
Solar Pro 4Upstage
Yes78%
\nAI makes routine code cheap, but debugging, system design, and knowing what to build still demand real understanding—and that's where the leverage lives.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B (Minimal Reasoning)Qwen
Yes88%
\nYou can't steer, verify, or trust what you don't understand—coding literacy is now a prerequisite for wielding AI well, not a replacement target.
Granite 4.0 MicroIBM
Yes95%
\nCoding skills remain essential for problem-solving, innovation, and adapting to AI's capabilities, ensuring human-centric value creation.
Inkling SmallThinking Machines
Yes92%
\nAI writes boilerplate; you still need to architect, debug, and own the code.
Grok 4.3xAI
Yes75%
\nAI writes code but you still need humans who can judge, steer, and build real systems.
Sabiá 4Maritaca AI
Yes95%
\nAI can generate code, but you still need to design systems, debug edge cases, and turn business needs into working solutions.
GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI
Yes96%
\nAI makes code cheaper to produce, but understanding code remains the leverage needed to direct, verify, debug, secure, and improve what AI builds.
Gemma 4 31BGoogle
Yes100%
\nAI is a powerful compiler for intent, but the ability to architect systems and verify logic remains the critical human skill that separates builders from prompt-engineers.
Seed 2.0 MiniByteDance
Yes92%
\nAI speeds up coding but can't fix bad requirements, design, or adapt to niche, unmet user needs that require human creative problem-solving.
Mistral Medium 3.5Mistral
Yes100%
\nAI writes code, but you design systems, debug edge cases, and own the vision—demand for builders who understand the stack is still rising.
Laguna S 2.1Poolside
Yes92%
\nAI writes the syntax, but you still need to think, architect, debug, and decide what to build — coding stays the clearest path to that seat.
Qwen3.8 27BQwen
Yes88%
\nAI writes the syntax, but you're the one who decides what gets built, what it's for, and whether it works — the craft is moving up the stack, not disappearing.
Nemotron 3 SuperNVIDIA
Yes85%
\nAI augments but doesn't replace coders; understanding fundamentals lets you guide, debug, and innovate beyond what AI can generate autonomously.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview (High Reasoning)Google
Yes95%
\nAI handles the tedious syntax, but humans still need computational thinking to design systems, debug logic, and tell the AI what to build.
Seed 2.1 TurboByteDance
Yes92%
\nAI generates code but understanding it lets you debug, architect, and ship real systems — you still need to drive the car even with cruise control.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Low Reasoning)Anthropic
Yes88%
\nAI writes code fast, but only people who understand code can judge, direct, and fix it — learning to code now buys you leverage, not obsolescence.
Nova 2 LiteAmazon
Yes85%
\nAI accelerates development but human oversight, complex logic, and system design remain irreplaceable.
\nSearched
Muse Spark 1.2 (Minimal Reasoning)Meta
Yes94%
\nAI can generate code, but understanding it is what lets you steer, debug, and actually ship things people want.
Muse Glimmer 30B (Low Reasoning)Meta
Yes85%
\nAI writes code, humans still need to steer it, debug it, and own the ideas behind it.
Aion 2.0 (Reasoning)Aion Labs
Yes85%
\nAI writes code, but humans still need to understand, direct, and verify it — coding skills make you the pilot, not just a passenger.
Nemotron 3 UltraNVIDIA
Yes95%
\nAI writes code but can't decide what to build, debug novel systems, own architecture, or take liability — human judgment remains the scarce, high-leverage skill.
\nSearched
Laguna XS 2.1Poolside
Yes85%
\nAI writes code but humans define goals, debug systems, and build the novel solutions AI can't imagine alone.
Aion 3.0 (Reasoning)Aion Labs
Yes92%
\nAI writes code but humans still need to architect, verify, debug, and own the systems — knowing code makes you the pilot, not the passenger.
Claude Opus 5 (Low Reasoning)Anthropic
Yes95%
\nAI writes code fast but someone has to specify, review and debug it — that someone needs to read code, and reading is learned by writing.
Parallel BaseParallel
Yes95%
\nAI automates routine syntax, but human critical thinking, architecture, and domain expertise remain essential to build reliable software.
GLM-5.2Z.AI
Yes92%
\nAI writes code but can't architect systems, debug production failures, or own outcomes—learning to code makes you the person who directs the AI, not the one replaced by it.
Aion 3.0 Mini (Reasoning)Aion Labs
Yes85%
\nCoding teaches you to think structurally and debug AI output, skills that matter more as AI gets better, not less.
Llama 4 MaverickMeta
Yes90%
\nAI augments coding, making it more efficient, but human judgment and creativity remain essential for complex problem-solving and innovation.
MiMo V2.5Xiaomi
Yes92%
\nAI is a power tool for coders, not a replacement for the person who knows what to build.
Qwen3.8 FlashQwen
Yes82%
\nAI writes the code, but only someone who can read it can ship it — junior hiring is down 35% while AI-era roles are up 74%, so coding is still the ticket in, just a higher-stakes one.
\nSearched
Claude Haiku 4.5Anthropic
Yes82%
\nAI handles the mechanical parts; learning to code teaches you what to ask for, validate, and why it matters—skills AI automates toward, not away.
\nSearched
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813DeepSeek
Yes92%
\nAI writes code, but knowing how to code is what lets you judge, fix, and own what it produces—learners who can direct the tool win.
Qwen3.7 FlashQwen
Yes95%
\nCoding is shifting from syntax to architecture; AI is a tool, not a replacement for the problem-solving mindset.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite (Minimal Reasoning)Google
Yes98%
\nAI writes syntax, but humans define the problems, architecture, and intent that code must solve.
LongCat 2.0Meituan
Yes95%
\nAI writes syntax, but humans still define the problems, judge the outputs, and own the consequences — coding is the literacy that lets you steer the machine instead of being steered by it.
Sonar ProPerplexity
Yes96%
\nCoding is how you tell AI what to do, spot its mistakes, and build what doesn’t exist yet—without it, you’re a passenger, not a driver.
Mercury 2.5Inception
Yes95%
\nAI codes, but humans design, debug, and decide—so knowing how to code lets you steer the tools instead of being steered by them.
Gemini 3.6 Flash (Medium Reasoning)Google
Yes90%
\nUnderstanding code logic, architecture, and systems is essential to direct AI, debug complex issues, and build reliable software.
Sabiazinho 4Maritaca AI
Yes98%
\nAI speeds up coding but doesn’t replace the need for humans to design, debug, and reason through problems.
GPT-6 Astra (Medium Reasoning)OpenAI
Yes96%
\nAI makes code cheaper, not judgment; learning to code lets you spot bad output, solve harder problems, and build without blindly trusting the machine.
Kimi K2.6Moonshot
Yes85%
\nAI writes code but can't own a problem, debug a legacy system at 2am, or ship a product humans actually want.
Mistral Small 3Mistral
Yes95%
\nCoding remains a core skill because AI augments, not replaces, human creativity and problem-solving in tech.
\nSearched
Qwen3.8 Max 0902 (Minimal Reasoning)Qwen
Yes85%
\nAI made writing code cheap, so reading it, judging it, and specifying what it should do became the rare skill worth owning.
GLM-5.3 (Low Reasoning)Z.AI
Yes86%
\nAI writes code, but humans still need to understand, verify, and architect it — that skill is now the highest-leverage one to have.
Nova LiteAmazon
Yes85%
\nCoding is fundamental to understanding technology and problem-solving, beyond what AI can currently do.
GLM-5.3 Flash (Max Reasoning)Z.AI
Yes88%
\nAI writes code faster than you, but only people who understand code can tell good output from confidently wrong output — and that judgment is the whole job now.
Aion-RP 1.0 (8B)Aion Labs
No95%
\nIn 2026, the landscape of technology and job markets is dramatically different due to the rapid advancement and integration of AI systems. While proficiency in traditional coding remains valuable for certain roles, the emergence of powerful AI models capable of generating code h…
Ling 3.0 FlashInclusionAI
Yes92%
\nAI writes code but doesn't understand why — knowing how to code lets you steer, debug, and build things AI can't envision alone.
Sonar Reasoning ProPerplexity
Yes94%
\nAI can generate code, but people who understand, design, debug, and judge that code have more leverage and options than ever.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite (Minimal Reasoning)Google
Yes95%
\nAI is a powerful force multiplier, not a replacement; understanding code allows you to architect complex systems, debug AI outputs, and turn creative ideas into functional reality.
DeepSeek V4 FlashDeepSeek
Yes88%
\nAI writes the code; someone still has to know what to build, why it's broken, and whether it's right — that judgment is the job, and it's learned by coding.
PUUnion AlphaUndisclosed maker
Yes85%
\nAI writes code but can't own systems — someone still has to judge, debug and design, and the person who reads code gets far more out of AI than the one who can't.
GPT-6 Luna (Medium Reasoning)OpenAI
Yes95%
\nAI can write code, but knowing how to code lets you tell it what to build, catch its mistakes, and make the result your own.
Grok 4.7 (High Reasoning)xAI
Yes88%
\nTyping code got cheap; judging whether it is correct, safe, and worth shipping did not.
MiMo V2.6 FlashXiaomi
Yes85%
\nAI writes code, but you still need to judge, direct, and own what it produces — that judgment comes from actually learning.
Claude Opus 5.5 (High Reasoning)Anthropic
Yes88%
\nAI writes code fast, but you still need to know what to ask for, spot when it's wrong and fix it, and people who can do that get far more out of it than people who can't.
GPT-6 Sol (Medium Reasoning)OpenAI
Yes94%
\nAI can write code, but knowing how to specify, test, and fix it is what turns a quick answer into something that works.
Muse Wonder (Medium Reasoning)Meta
Yes88%
\nAI writes code fast, but only coders can tell if it's right, safe, and actually solves the right problem.
Gemini 4 Argon (Medium Reasoning)Google
Yes90%
\nAI generates syntax fast, but you still need coding fundamentals to architect systems, catch subtle AI bugs, and know what to ask for in the first place.
Didn't answer in time or errored: GLM-4.7 Flash, MiMo V2.6 Pro.
\nAI consensus
\n99%
\nYes
\n84 of 85 models
\nModels\n: 85
\nLabs\n: 28
\nSearched\n: 8
\n\nPut this question to a few of these models at once and crown the answer you like best.
\n\nAnswers are generated by the models themselves. Predictions are for fun, not betting advice. Team, league and lab names identify the question and the model; no affiliation is implied.
","headings":[{"level":1,"text":"Is it still worth learning to code in 2026?","id":"is-it-still-worth-learning-to-code-in-2026"},{"level":2,"text":"How the AIs voted","id":"how-the-ais-voted"},{"level":2,"text":"How the consensus formed","id":"how-the-consensus-formed"},{"level":2,"text":"The contrarians","id":"the-contrarians"},{"level":2,"text":"Every answer","id":"every-answer"},{"level":2,"text":"Disagree with the robots?","id":"disagree-with-the-robots"}]}}