[tasty_freeze]

I can't wait for the LLM() function to drop.

  body { LLM(
    "You are an expert web designer, completely fluent in CSS.
    Create styling for this commerce website which is both
    eye-catching yet professional looking, while being engaging.
    Ensure it conforms to accessibility standards."
   ) }

[garbagepatch]

That's already the present. The result is just cached.

[cyphar]

You forgot "Take a deep breath. Don't make mistakes. An old lady will die if you misplace a div."

[miladyincontrol]

Anecdotally I've found it better telling the llm it's in a high growth tech startup on an H1B, any mistake will risk termination and being sent back home where they'll have to become a trash picker.

[ASalazarMX]

I'm always surprised how eager are LLMs to role play.

[m463]

it is unethical to do this without stimulating the economy:

  LLM("You are an expert at coffee shop ordering.
       order a venti iced caramel macchiato,
       half-caf, almond milk, light ice and
       send it to table 9")

[ww520]

That's what a LLM based template engine looks like.

[falcor84]

I actually am really looking forward to a future where we have better tooling for a true "user agent" that knows my preferences and can style every page automatically just ust the way I like it (and letting me override anything by asking it once and having it remember). I'm so tired of UX designers choosing things for me assuming I'm a 5-year old.

[ponooqjoqo]

It seems far more likely that we'll end up in a state where you won't be able to override CSS at all. You'll be allowed to use only the most modern version of Google Chrome because all the websites will simply require a private auth key that only Chrome possesses, and commands like cURL will no longer function properly. The devtools console will be locked behind a key that you must petition Google to get, and if you use it for anything other than what they want, your permissions will be revoked without further recourse.

[politelemon]

I've had similar thoughts but replacing Google with Apple who I could easily seeing doing parts of this. They have the platform stranglehold and abusive history to support the behaviour and current browser "enforcement", with little to nothing in the way of consequences.

[notpushkin]

It’s a very sad future, but totally plausible at this point. We’ve got to fight this.

[verandaguy]

Two counterpoints to this.

- A good designer will be able to produce a page whose looks are appropriately engaging, complementary to the content, unique, and easy on the eyes. For every abrasive CSS (or lack thereof) justfuckingusehtml.com, there's a masterpiece like acko.net, many of which just aren't in the mainstream.

- If everything ends up looking the same wouldn't that get... boring? I get the desire to avoid obnoxious design choices, but those obnoxious design choices are part of the web, and they should be embraced as part of the decision-making process about if and how you want to keep reading a site. A bit of friction is, IMO, a good thing when browsing the web. It's the minimum level of keeping the web an interactive medium rather than just a content pipe.

That said, you do you. You're well within your rights to browse the web how you want, up to and including using automation to re-style sites with extreme prejudice.

[dalmo3]

> asking it once and having it remember

Uhhh, that reminds me of the super duper helpful way YouTube automatically enables dubbing and/or subtitles based on the last video I watched, my browser language, my account language, where I am in the world, phase of the moon, the colour of my shirt...

[nicbou]

"Can you make it pop more?"

[dgfitz]

hallucinates ‘fluent’ and draws a net to catch eyes