[toiletfuneral]

As a designer none of these make me worried about my skill set, they all look pretty bad with the slightest amount of attention.

The real concern is how ugly a world the capitalists are willing accept to cut labor costs, and we know the answer, just look what capitalism did architecture. Dogshit buildings everywhere designed by contractors to avoid skilled labor. What an ugly time to be alive

[echelon]

This is day one.

You're seeing the results of amateurs adapting unspecialized tools. They're using minimal effort and still deriving head turning results.

A great analogy might be all the folks making Geocities websites back in '99. Look at how far we've come from that. Can you even fathom where we'll be in five years? (Or even just this fall, given the pace of research and new startups optimizing models/workflows?)

These tools are going to be specially purposed for every domain soon. VC is going to pour into every possible optimization niche, and talented teams will build specially purposed tools that put entire careers on easy mode.

This is good. We shouldn't want to write HTML any more than we should want to churn butter.

The job of designer will change to incorporate the new workflows. But everything else will also change. Websites of 2000-2020 will look as dated as magazine ads. New websites will be rich and interactive as never before.

This is the biggest boom and shakeup of our industry perhaps ever. Get excited by the opportunities. You're not going to have to work like a caveman designer anymore. You'll be a year 2080 designer before the decade ends.

[gtirloni]

> New websites will be rich and interactive as never before.

So Flash is making a comeback?

[grugagag]

> Websites of 2000-2020 will look as dated as magazine ads. New websites will be rich and interactive as never before.

Why? Do we need any of that aside from specialized tools (e.g. data intensive) for which it actually makes sense to use tried and proven tech?

Im sure new things are going to come out of AI, they’re already becoming obvious. But using AI to build things we already know how to do and just add more complexity is bound to not go anywhere useful in my opinion.

[peytoncasper]

I'm truly amazed at this opinion which seems to be prevalent on this thread. The models are tools that already have the ability to accelerate your work now, and will massively improve over the next decade. Comparing it to things we already know how to do provides the ability to benchmark and see how much value it brings to the table. Being on the forefront, exploring, and hacking on side projects has always been the best way to understand new stuff.

"Using cars to drive down roads we already know how to traverse with horses and just add more complexity is bound to not go anywhere useful in my opinion."

[grugagag]

To fit better with your analogy, how about using AI to invent a vehicle without using the tools and expertise of engineers that already have experience in building cars. And let AI figure how many doors it needs to have, how many wheels, how an engine works and all that because why not? Maybe it will come up with a batter idea, screw any experience and history we have building anything.

[thedorkknight]

Ironic analogy given that we still don't really have AI-driven cars replacing drivers yet...

[minusf]

is that you sidney?

[jfvinueza]

how do magazine ads look dated?

[andybak]

I'm trying to understand what you're asking here and failing.

[ericmcer]

This page isn't something the AI built, the AI built specifically defined pieces of it and the author assembled those into the page using Webflow. I feel like their claim of "no-code" is a bit suspect. Embedding an AI generated block of code into a Webflow site has nothing to do with AI generating a website. If I add a block of AI generated code to a pull request that isn't "Using AI to write an entire PR".

AI still feels like self-driving cars to me. People saw some shadow of success there and said "by 2020 cars won't even have steering wheels" but who knows now if we will ever see them. I could be totally wrong, but my prediction is we see a ton of cool stuff but getting that last 5% down to where we can actually trust AI to run the show will not happen for a long time if ever.

[shrimpx]

I mean, that's been the trend line of every paradigm, hasn't it? Quality & craftsmanship being sacrificed to scale & automation.

I'd say the good part of AI coding is the democratization of programming. It'll be shittier than hand-crafted stuff but more broadly available and empowering more people to make their own stuff.

[pixl97]

Handcrafted nails were better than machine made ones?

I'm not sure it's easy to make sweeping statements like this and generally needs to be looked at a case by case basis.

[shrimpx]

Btw handcrafted nails is indeed a niche upscale market.

But I agree that some things are highest quality or feasible to build only when mass produced, like semiconductors.

[sebzim4500]

>Dogshit buildings everywhere designed by contractors to avoid skilled labor.

This seems to be the opinion of everyone on HN, but I never encounter this in real life (and do not agree with it myself). Where I live (mainly London, but I've spent a bit of time in some US cities as well) the buildings being built/applying for planning permission look pretty good. It's the ones built in the late 20th century that are hideous.

[kypro]

I doubt profit hungry capitalists are your main concern, but your average struggling startup or entrepreneur.

At a startup I worked for we spent about £10,000 just on our brand and website design. That was a big chunk of our budget and I'm genuinely not sure that would be needed anymore. I think I could probably prompt AI to design a site and logo roughly as good.