> this page is highly effective at conveying information

Is it though? If the page is near unreadable?

* Almost pure-black background rendering every not-pure-white colour barely readable

* Dark-grey and low saturation colours used almost everywhere, for both fonts and other coloured elements (the orange cells in the calendar are the most readable thing)

* Thin fonts - coupled with the dark grey colours this just adds to the readability issues

* Yet another incredibly long info-dump of a page

And then as far as actual information:

* Vanity metrics as the main information, that is a lot of things with no context or historical information

* A lot of aggregates and rollups that aren't that useful

No, I haven't tried Reader Mode.

It's a good demo for UI state syncing though, I'll give it that.

> Who cares how it was produced?

Well, we're at least two people who care, since we were conversing about how good/bad the webdesign is, then you jumped in here :) If you don't care, why bother to reply to people who seemingly do care? What kind of conversation are you expecting here, "Yeah, do tooo"? :|

At least Boostrap pages were readable ;)

Here is a provocative thought - maybe these are the so-called "better designs" from LLMs? It's not like writing English sentences is some huge secret you are sitting on that no one else knows.

what would you ask to get a better design?

as someone who doesn't know how to get better design out of LLMs, can you elaborate?