Remix.run Logo
▲ arecsu a day ago

The thing with these kind of projects is that... What value do they really bring to the table? Because if it's so easy to come up with something like this (and arguably easier over time), then if I need a UI toolkit and components for my app, I can just prompt them right away to obtain something like this with minimal effort. Plus, adapted to my needs, my code, my platforms and language. UI/UX done right is still a dance between design and engineering. But I'm not sure these libraries do solve anything meaningful today that is worth the abstraction and dependency.

▲pan69 a day ago | parent | next [-]

I am pretty sure that, even though this project is generated by AI, there will be a large majority of quicks and edge cases and bugs, just like as if a bunch of people would have written it. It's just that the initial bulk of the code was produced in a fraction of the time. All those bugs, quicks and edge-case still need to be resolved (if you were to actually use this). If you prompt your own version of this you just end up with your own set of bugs, quirks and edge-cases. The nature of software hasn't changed, just the speed with which we produce it.

▲creata a day ago | parent [-]

I promise you, this project has not addressed the quirks and edge cases. I don't think many of these components have even been tested by a human, because there are glaring omissions that you'd see if you just played around with them for a minute.

Do you think that this person is going to stick around and fix those issues, or just move on to the next impressive project in a week?

▲pan69 a day ago | parent [-]

> there are glaring omissions that you'd see if you just played around with them for a minute.

That was more or less the point I was trying to make. You can vibe-code your own variant of this project (as the poster I was replying to suggested) but you run into the same problem that you need many more iterations of refinement. If we think that everyone is simply going to vibe-code their own UI frameworks (or whatever) going forward then I think that is a wrong assumption. The nature of software development hasn't changed, just the speed at which we can produce it.

This is just a comment in general, not specific to the project posted by OP.

▲bloppe 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is a question that pops up all over the place these days. I can offer one answer.

System design is principally a process of identifying the best possible points at which to decouple the components that will make up the system. A clean design means that components can be swapped out for alternatives easily. Messy designs result in interlocking complexity.

Structuring your components as a general-purpose re-usable library forces you to consider how it is decoupled from consumers. If you do a good job designing it, it should be usable by all sorts of consumers, so you might as well make it a standalone library.

To a first approximation, I think this process of identifying clean decoupling points is the main thing that humans still need to babysit their agents over.

▲mjburgess a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

~200 USD in 1mo of claude, and 4 days of developer time -- call it 5000 USD

▲up2isomorphism 19 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Very little. The motivation of contributing the open source is almost never a product, it is the feedback loop of work and achievement. Nobody will contribute to this kind of thing, because there is no feedback loop here.

▲ a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
▲voidhorse 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It has no value, and you can tell basically immediately.

People are becoming extremely lazy and shipping the first slop the model generates because they get a rush from putting their stuff in tot he world as fast as possible.

However, I would bet significant money that all the projects like this (where every aspect has hallmark slopisms (the vibe interface design, the copy) will lose out to projects that are also heavily AI coded but that took the time and care to actually polish and differentiate themselves and thus are later to the game because they shipped after a few weeks or a month of work and refinement instead of a day.

AI can save you a lot of time but it can't save you from your own lack of restraint and your inability to discern and be an objective judge of the value your thing will have to other people. For software, mere existence is no longer sufficient anymore. Anyone can generate whatever you made instantly if you put zero effort or discernment into it. This is why so many of the Ainfluencers are emphasizing "taste".

But even taste won't save you on the end either, since anyone can clone your stuff as soon as it ships.

I personally think the future of software is probably just two extremes:

1. Personal dinky vibe coded apps that all have their individual creator as the sole user.

2. Large scale apps that don't work without significant marshaling of hard physical resources (e.g. LLMs themselves).

All the middle bits, user applications that target a specific problem space but that run locally and/or don't need legions of data centers and networks to run, will probably just die eventually. Maybe a couple of established apps will stick around in business contexts because employees all using their own personal apps and workflows causes too much coordination overhead, but at the consumer level I fully except everyone will be just vibing their own stuff pretty soon here.

▲jasomill 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I doubt it, as the principle of "garbage in, garbage out" still very much applies to LLMs. With or without AI, I'm not so naive to assume I'm going to quickly produce better software to solve well-established problems than others, with access to the same tools, who have put more time and effort into producing substantially similar software.

For specific and uncommon use cases? Sure. For something as generally applicable as a photo editor or a general purpose OS? Not a chance.