Remix.run Logo
▲ sikozu 4 hours ago

I didn't expect this.

While I do believe that selling to DigitalOcean was a mistake ultimately, I'm concerned about the long time viability of this move considering the current landscape of web development.

Don't get me wrong, I think CSS-Tricks is a great resource and it has helped me over the years, but if I was in Geoff's shoes right now I'd be pretty scared.

Look at TailwindCSS for example, they had to reduce the size of their team and ended up joining Shopify to continue surviving. It is hard out here these days.

I don't want to sound too doom and gloom, so I wish Geoff the best of luck and I hope he succeeds.

▲codingdave 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I'd be pretty scared.

Scared of what, exactly? It looks to me like the site is primarily static content, so operational costs should be reasonable. He could scale down to just static content, and even if traffic decrease, it is not an existential crisis. Or am I missing something?

▲cael450 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The cost of purchasing the property from digital ocean and the cost of his team.

▲chinathrow 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Have we seen a price tag?

▲webdood90 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

How does one pull a 6 figure salary from a blog site in 2026?

▲simonw 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Attract an audience of people who make purchasing decisions, then attract sponsors who want to be put in front of those people. Quality of readers is more important than quantity.

▲dfabulich 2 hours ago | parent [-]

You're saying that like it's straightforward hard work. But that strategy has been on the decline for years, with no sign of reversing. High-value technical audiences aren't Googling for educational articles, videos, and courses. They're just asking LLMs, and getting answers. Sometimes the LLMs are searching the web, but LLMs approximately never click on the ads.

▲simonw an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I didn't say it was easy. I'm doing this myself at the moment, so I have a sample size of one showing it's possible.

▲ 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
▲beepbooptheory 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Run a relatively small political Substack and just bide your time till you get picked to run CBS News.

▲ 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
▲moffkalast 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Become an alt right grifter and get paid by billionaires' bots to help destroy democracy.

▲esskay 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The tailwind ones slightly misleading. They laid off their staff, posted on twitter about it, opened a sponsorship program, made approximately $2 million, and THEN joined shopify.

▲danielvaughn 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Agree the market is weird right now, but on that specific example - TailwindCSS was built around the notion of reducing keystrokes per style (basically). That's not as useful in the age of AI, of course. CSS-Tricks is about learning what modern CSS can do, which is arguably still useful. An uphill battle, for sure, but I think there's still a place for hand written human content on the web, so I plan to support it even if it's just with my clicks.

▲Tadpole9181 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> TailwindCSS was built around the notion of reducing keystrokes per style (basically).

That "basically" is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

I don't even use Tailwind and I know the point is to localize basic style information and reduce the amount of weird CSS you have to write via functions and utilities.

Especially because Tailwind came well before CSS started natively having these features (let alone them becoming baseline widely available).

Both of those goals definitely help the current era of agents by making it easier to find the rules that affect an element without needing to reliably search all of the project CSS, and reducing required context use and the need to keep track of selector lists.

▲danielvaughn 43 minutes ago | parent [-]

By localizing basic style information and reducing the amount of weird CSS you have to write, you have thus reduced your keystrokes per style. We're talking about the same thing.

▲Tadpole9181 31 minutes ago | parent [-]

No, the semantics are different. The goal has never been "type less", which changes how it interacts with your premise. The goal has been reduce cognitive load and increase semantic density and discoverability. And, counter to what you said ("that's not as useful in the age of AI"), those are very useful in the current age of AI.

▲fsckboy 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>While I do believe that selling to DigitalOcean was a mistake ultimately

using the word "ultimately" makes this "Monday night quarterbacking"

It's not a mistake to plan a picnic for a day that turns out to be rainy, even if you got paid to plan the picnic.

It would be a mistake to sell if the seller should have known at the time of the sale that the seller's goals would not be met, but something turning out badly doesn't retroactively make it having been a mistake, it just means it came out badly.

▲meerita 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The guys made some money, it's not bad idea, specially knowing nobody cares now tutorials on internet with the era of agentic development. See StackOverflow, it's dead. They did the right thing when selling this.

▲jmaw 4 hours ago | parent [-]

CSS-Tricks was sold to Digital Ocean a while back. Now it's been purchased by an individual again. Someone who used to work on it back in the day

▲meerita 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I bet they bought it for a tenth of the price they've sold it.

▲gkoberger 3 hours ago | parent [-]

It's the opposite... Digital Ocean bought it for $4M; I bet they sold it for $0 (rather than shut it down).

(EDIT: oh maybe you're saying the same thing and I misunderstood?)

▲meerita 3 hours ago | parent [-]

We are ;)

▲lifeisloving 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Llms are not good at web design or writing css, this art form will live on for a long time to come. It is art, I dont care what people say, and as we all know machines mostly suck at creating art. Anthropic claims to have started training in "taste", but im sure they've realized that cannot be distilled into vector embeddings. Taste is somewhat empheral and is dictated by society and culture that machines can't experience.

In fact, I think it will have more staying power than most, if not all of web dev domains of expertise.

Theres simply no "soul" behind llm crafted websites. There are companies out there, like lovable et al who sell the idea that web design is solved but are still hiring six figure retainer design firms to do their frontend.

I believe the best web platforms will heavily invest in human crafted UI/UX because that is what will make you stand out. The rest will get thrown on the slop pile and forgotten.

▲ultrarunner 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The thing is, there's no end to the appetite to lower quality in order to reduce personal cost. Whether there's a website or not is very "seen". Whether it's any good at evoking intended understandings or organizing information is not (directly) seen. Unfortunately, only a very small portion of humanity directly cares about design.

▲psygn89 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I shared your sentiment maybe a year+ ago when it comes to css, and I do think it's one of the areas AI in general struggles with (where art and code meet), but it's a lot better today with the latest OpenAI and Anthropic models as someone that works on design systems for a living (for now). It follows stylistic patterns, it can inspect the issue in the browser and have a better understanding of CSS upstream effects than it used to (it used to suck at this and paint itself into a corner over and over like some game of whack-a-mole), and can even tackle things using latest interop features.

It does make really silly mistakes now and then, like using fallback css variables in the wrong order, but they are fewer and farther in between.

"I believe the best web platforms will heavily invest in human crafted UI/UX because that is what will make you stand out. The rest will get thrown on the slop pile and forgotten."

Agreed!

▲bloomca 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I see your point and I agree that ultimately web design will be incredibly hard to automate, probably harder than almost any other programming domain, where people will likely stay for accountability reasons.

But the thing is that for the vast majority of web pages/applications, it barely matters what does the design look like, especially for B2B/internal apps. All the dashboards, CRMs, tracking tools, etc -- these exist mostly for functional requirements, so the design just needs to be inoffensive.

B2C market might hold longer, but ultimately there might emerge some sort of higher-level design specification language which would sidestep the original problem or being too recognizable.

▲NoDodgeQuestion 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

AI model taste is not good, but taste is easy and many cheap human have soul, only hard part is memorize CSS trivia, I predict cost of UI/UX go down and CSS education business also go down

▲Legend2440 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You can just make a mockup in whatever tool you want, and pour your 'art' and 'soul' into that.

Then hand it to the LLM and it'll make CSS to match.

▲reaperducer 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Spoken like someone who's never actually put their art and soul into a mockup and asked an LLM to make CSS to match.

▲ramesh31 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>"I'm concerned about the long time viability of this move considering the current landscape of web development."

I owe Coyier and CSS Tricks a huge debt to getting my career started in the 2000s. It's loss will be tragic. But web development (as we knew it) has gone the way of elevator operators. Dead and gone. Good on the guys for getting their bag while it still had some value.