I’ve spent the better part of the last 2 years both using coding models and trying to help these models deliver higher quality code and I honestly could not agree more with Zach here… https://www.zachleat.com/web/ai-websites/
I don’t understand what @zachleat 's post is about. Is he complaining that AI is just another tool that doesn’t improve anything, but actually makes things worse? What are those strange rectangles that run along a timeline for each AI company? It’s completely incomprehensible if you’re not familiar with it. ?🤷?
Helloes! 👋
I didn’t wait for the box thingies, but IMO the tldr is, freeing up dev time now does not & never has driven web site quality
I’ve never worked anywhere that defined FE quality holistically
Problem is;
1) standard of FE has always (~25yrs) been low cos it’s deceptively hard - broad, moves fast, declarative, audience is diverse…
2) co-opting of FE by framework narratives harmful cos code “quality” != ux quality
@stekopf @zachleat I think he’s complaining that — left to its own devices — it will tend toward the average when it comes to web dev, which means bad things for performance, accessibility, usability, etc.
The filmstrips were a video representation of how long it takes for many AI company homepages to load — a subtle jab at the quality of the models being related to the low quality of the sites they’re likely to had a hand in building.
It’s a case for the importance of craft.