ryanbrunner

Try flipping it, that's what I do. I usually prompt AI for research, absorb thta, write my own thing, and then ask AI to proofread it and I'll let it fix small grammatical errors and typos, while larger structural suggestions I'll still implement myself. It doesn't take much more time in my experience and I'm infinitely more satisfied with my output.

I would say the vast majority of people outside a tech bubble will not be offended by "we didn't use AI to write any of this" (the converse might be true though!)

As other people have said, if I wanted AI slop I'd just ask Claude.

Maybe better phrased as "another human". If you're prompting AI for your own purposes that's totally fine, just absorb the information and summarize it for people instead of just dumping AI output directly on them.

It's expected to call out people (usually in DMs) when they post AI generated stuff. Occasionally people will link to a claude doc as like an "additional details here" type note, but that's the extent of it.

It's entirely possible that people have just finely tuned AI to perfectly mimic them, but if it passes the Turing test, I guess I have nothing to complain about. Our rules are less about some fundamental opposition to AI and more that it's just annoying to read unedited AI slop.

Our workplace are heavy users of AI for nearly everything, but we still hold to the rule that if the audience of text is a human, it should be written by a human.

AI generated text is still exhausting to read.

I created this to make working with agents on the review cycle of tasks easier, but I've found it really useful to start something new too - spin up a session on a part of an app you'd like to make design improvements to, and you can interactively work with AI on improving it.

The obvious difference between your experiences and the person you're replying to is that he's residing there and you're visiting. You're right that your rights are far more limited when you're a visitor to a country crossing a border, but he and this thread are talking about what rights residents to a country have regarding the border.

They have to demonstrate value absolutely, but you're forgetting about the denominator of cost, and to a large degree so is the industry right now.

To take this argument to an absurd level, if Fable generating a feature cost $100,000 and Sonnet generating the same feature cost $1, it wouldn't be enough that Fable is marginally, significantly, or even dramatically better, because the cost difference is so outsized. For a variety of reasons, the true cost of tokens for frontier models is downplayed at multiple points (whether it's through AI companies running off funding, companies prioritizing AI adoption over AI costs, etc.)

If cost is not an issue at all, the best thing is always preferable regardless of cost. But in most cases, and AI is no exception, eventually cost will be an issue.

An easy counterargument is that the frontier models are swallowing all of the attention and money because they currently don't have a constraint of demonstrating that their value exceeds their cost. Take that away and it might turn out that cheaper models that are "good enough" and can be profitable are the more attractive route.

The value of those models doesn't necessarily though. To extend the personal computer analogy, a server rack has always been more powerful than the average desktop computer but a personal computer got "good enough" at enough tasks that people just used those instead.

Do you store your CSS in separate common files independent of markup? Out of curiosity, do you run into issues with excessive token usage when you want to work with CSS?

That would be my gut instinct - you ask your agent to change a CSS rule, and your agent would feel the need to find all usage of that rule to avoid introducing unexpected changes. Does that happen? (I'm operating purely on assumptions here because I regularly use tailwind where changes are kinda definitionally local).

Articles like this remind me of that Innovation Tokens article.

Your time and attention is precious as a developer. I'm absolutely sure it's possible to implement uniqueness constraints, transactions, indices, and history yourself, but is that really the most valuable use of your time? There's probably not a need for you to have a unique solution, so you're quite literally just re-inventing something someone already had for not a lot of benefit.

Wouldn't your time be better spent actually solving the problems that whatever you're building is supposed to solve?

It's common to want things that look like buttons that functionally link to a page.

This isn't really straightforward with the HTML `button` tag so `a` tags that appear like buttons are common. I'm not really proposing something out of the ordinary here, nearly every high level component library that has a built in "button" will support applying them to `a` tags and most likely have that as their primary example of a button.

In my experience, if you're going to aggressively componentize whatever you're building (i.e. a button isn't a css class on a simple `a` tag but a distinct component that exists in it's own file somewhere) there's huge advantages to having your styling be associated directly with your components, and Tailwind is a great option (among many) for that.

If you're building something where your unit of organization looks more like a "page" than super fine grained elements, Tailwind will just make things messy and a higher-level library or writing your own CSS would be a better approach.

I don't think this changes much with AI - right now most models are not terrific at maintaining a huge degree of context in larger projects, so I could absolutely see an agent implementing CSS that works well in isolation but breaks due to the cascade. Maybe that changes in the future, but right now if anything I think Tailwind is well suited to AI because it enforces a certain locality to the changes you're making (i.e. you can reasonably assume that a `text-red-500` class on an element isn't going to break things elsewhere and wll do what it says on the box).