A tale about how coding agents are actually making me more and more interested in design

99 points•yakkomajuri•1 day ago•56 comments•

56 comments

fiatpandas1 day ago
OP, you accidentally invented the design process that they teach in design school. You can officially call yourself a designer.

1) have a high level functional goal

2) be inspired and think of a motif

3) go wide within that motif and explore

4) narrow in on a single direction and iterate

5) fine tune the details until you are creatively satisfied and the design meets your goals from step 1.

tallship1 day ago
I think, many of the folks commenting below, mentioning that the OP hasn't actually studied in a design program in school, also fail to mention that the attorney, and later U.S. President, Abraham Lincoln also had no formal education in learning to read.

The latter, in his path toward literacy, and eventually a J.D. (That's what attorneys are nowadays anyway) was largely due to his stubborn autodidactism, the same mettle that the OP himself chronicles and showcases in his blog.

If you put most people participating (or lurking) here on Hacker News through this scrutiny, you really shouldn't be surprised that this is generally the case with anyone who's been working in data processing, Management Information Systems, Information Technology, or WhatEv we're going to be calling it in the next decade.

Nowadays, when I think of n00bs, I don't think about the computer illiterate, I think about the motivated neophytes who spent two years grinding along in an IT track in college at the snails pace of semester courses and now they can consider themselves entry level python programmers with an extra semester where they took "Introduction to Java - CS-107".

If you're going to survive in this industry, you already have an insatiable curiosity for everything under the hood and morbid obsessions with break/fix - emphasis on 'fix' :)

If it looks like Yakko (the OP of this thread) went through two semesters (that really is a freakin' year in trad educational systems) of design school, but in reality really didn't... You would be wrong. He just did it on his own and at a pace he was comfortable with, arriving at the same dock to berth his ship as someone who actually spent a year being forced learn it at a snails pace.

Not everyone can be a network engineer, or a systems administrator, or full stack developer, etc., but those who thrive upon the work are almost always exceedingly autodidacts in those disciplines...

You literally cannot keep up with the pace of evolving technologies if you're doing so in a legacy educational institution.

Interview question: "Tell me about a nightmare scenario you were faced with when you were without the knowledge to fix the problem and yet, did so anyway - how and what did you do to rise to the occasion, and how did that make you feel like when everyone was back online again?"

argeeabout 23 hours ago

    Where ignorance is bliss, / 'Tis folly to be wise
I have such an insatiable curiosity, but it really strips the "magic" from the world more often than not. I think it's much more fun to make believe that no one understands LLMs, for example, than to know that not only do we understand them quite well enough, it is also quite boring in the end. As are all things once the curtain has been peeked.
dprkhabout 24 hours ago
> If you're going to survive in this industry

I really feel like it's very much random.

When job hunting -> does the recruiter shortlist you?

When on the job -> do you get laid off?

Neither has anything to do with your skills at the actual job.

ch4s31 day ago
It’s funny, this is exactly how I used opus to design an iOS app I’m building. Unfortunately fable was released and it seems my taste lines up with fable’s training quite a bit[1]. Now my app looks like ai anyway. You win some you lose some I guess.

[1] https://onda-cast.github.io/onda/

socializer1 day ago
Yeah, and the trade-off here is that it takes time. In the same way, you can write insightful blog posts or work emails using AI if you maintain creative control, but all of sudden, you're not moving at 100x speed. You're moving a lot closer to human speed.

This trade-off is something I like the least about AI. In the time it takes someone to produce excellent results using AI without giving up control, people unconcerned with quality or style can produce 100x as much. So by the end of the day, your inbox or your social media feed is mostly slop.

agilek1 day ago
The fact it takes time is not a trade-off. It is an actual design work.
augment_me1 day ago
I mean, one part of the trade-off is that you can be a designer without having gone to design school. If you can use the tools you can iterate on the averageness of all these professions and fill all those shoes.

Choose 1:

A UX-designer with that outputs design with AI at the speed of a UX-designer without AI

A programmer that can output designs with AI at the same speed, and make your database, and make your helpdesk, and make your social media, booking systems, etc.

hk13371 day ago
That sounds like basic project management
echelon1 day ago
I'm sure this is all in the training data.

I like hearing it articulated for me.

FlamingMoe1 day ago
I have never heard this, but I like it a lot.
ananmays1 day ago
A designer did make it! The process you undertook is called design!
OzzyB1 day ago
We need to make ppl understand this!
xattt1 day ago
What prompt should I use to replicate similar epiphanies?
arecsu1 day ago
Literally yes
Gualdrapo1 day ago
> Most times I'll grab ideas from multiple places, combine them, and endlessly iterate on them until I get to something I'm happy with.

The "designer" happens to not to be human. At that point it just sounds like going to a website template store and scrolling endlessly through options until you find a template you'd say "meh, this will do".

SV_BubbleTime1 day ago
I had this out with one of my employees, they were giving me shit for using Claude Design, and just how many iterations it took to get what I wanted.

I explained that exactly what design is I just lack the skills to do it in illustrator and Photoshop but yes, no one gets it right the first time.

jjcm1 day ago
It looks like a lot of their early attemps are early gpt outputs or claude design outputs, which have a lot of the same smell. People are discounting how good image->html flows are these days though.

I had gemini describe this webpage as prompts, then fed it into an image -> code pipeline. Note that this is with 0 input from me:

https://html.non.io/railcode-animated

This is with Opus 5.5 building it out on low effort, and yes the spec was already made from the original site, but 0->1 that doesn't result in purple gradients or claude brown is very much possible now.

Honestly looks better than the original
Disagree, the colors are harsh
Best tip in here: when tweaking details like colors and fonts, just ask Claude to make you throwaway picker tools right in the site.

This is totally obvious in retrospect but I never thought of it (probably because of 25 years of thinking about tools in terms of reusable components).

Thanks for writing!

chmod7751 day ago
Answer: because a human designed it in an iterative process. LLMs just wrote the code.
phoronixrly1 day ago
And it still carries some of the cliche features of LLM-'designed' sites.
yakkomajuri1 day ago
It definitely does. Particularly under the hero imo.

Doing this is really time-consuming so certainly there were some corners cut -- need to also focus on product after all!

Particularly after we changed a lot of the messaging (after this post was written) I slacked off a bit. Keen to hear what's most annoying to you though, always looking for feedback.

preommr1 day ago
like what?

The website is simple enough that any design decicion could just as well ahve been done by a real human.

The em-dashes, and the gradients were always egregious because they're strong opinionated decisions. This is just a straighforward, clean, tasteful website (really what most sites should aim for).

Read the full thread on Hacker News →

Related stories