Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 319 posts

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#121

Post by vehemenz »

spankalee wrote: post #106
spockz wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don’t understand this idea that seems to be prevalent to let the LLM generate everything from scratch instead of using existing battle tested frameworks. Be it for css or backend code. Good modular design of software and separation of concern are still important for debugging and lifecycle. For (instructing) the llm it will also be easier if it uses frameworks as the resulting code of the project itself will…

CSS simply doesn't need a framework - there's no "from scratch". For humans or LLM authors. Tailwind is a lot of overhead conceptually and tooling wise to just not have to write classnames, and it's actually anti-modular.

Can you explain? Tailwind massively reduces overhead for abstraction, classing, documentation, and maintenance.

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#122

Post by SXX »

babypuncher wrote: post #113
birken wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of headcount do you estimate $1MM/year can reliably support? That's like ~2 engineers at FAANG.

Lots of great engineers will work for way less than a FAANG salary as long as it means not having to work for FAANG. $1m/year still won't get you all that much though.

Lots and lots of people work for much less or for free on whatever they like.

Problem is that doing "boring" parts of open source project maintenance is not very exciting for many top tier developers so it should pay at least competetively for experience or people will just burn out.

And while you can obviously fund a team of 20 on $1M/year outside of US whatever said team will manage to keep up to the level of quality is another question.

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#123

Post by jeffbee »

DrBenCarson wrote: post #70
Eridrus wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is actually kind of infamous for not using much in the way of OSS software. The list of things I can think of is: * Linux * LLVM * Webkit/Chrome (which they have done the majority of contributions to for a long time) * Java & a little bit of Python

Didn’t they open source Kubernetes (aka probably the biggest OSS project since Linux itself)

Biggest in what sense? Certainly not in terms of the size of the code base. It is an order of magnitude smaller than Chromium.

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#124

Post by [deleted] »

zeroCalories wrote: post #114
babypuncher wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of great engineers will work for way less than a FAANG salary as long as it means not having to work for FAANG. $1m/year still won't get you all that much though.

Realistically if you can work on a small and high profile project like tailwind you're gonna be snatched up by someone willing to pay you at or near FAANG levels

[deleted]

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#125

Post by doublerabbit »

tehlike wrote: post #80
dust42 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if you subtract linux and LLVM and Webkit and Java, what is left of Google? Absolutely nothing. Well, a mostly empty, dysfunctional mono repo lacking the main dependencies.

Come on.

Oh yeah, manipulating users and monetary siphoning data with their advertising schemes.

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#126

Post by vehemenz »

spankalee wrote: post #39
northern-lights wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to be in Google's interest to keep Tailwind CSS afloat. Tailwind CSS is alive -> New / existing projects keep using Tailwind CSS -> more code for Gemini to train upon -> better and fancier UIs being created through Gemini -> popularity and usage of Gemini doesn't go down Of course this applies to any other LLM provider too but I guess Google saw this opportunity first.

I think it'd be better for AI and web dev if AIs generated real CSS instead. The supposed difficulty of tracking from elements to classes to rulesets is something that AIs can easily handle, and being able to change a ruleset once and have the update apply to all use sites is really good for AI-driven changes. Plus, humans and AIs won't have to wait for Tailwind to adopt new CSS features as they are added. If the AI…

Tailwind is almost too simple to bother using an LLM for. There’s no reason to introduce high-level abstractions (your “real” CSS, I imagine) that make the code more complicated, unless you have some clever methodology.

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#127

Post by ericmcer »

ricardobeat wrote: post #104
mdasen wrote: post #14

This is good, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Tailwind is out of the financial difficulty that we talked about yesterday. You can sponsor Tailwind for as little as $6,000/year. 29 companies were already sponsoring Tailwind including 16 companies at the $60,000/year level. Maybe Google AI Studio has decided to shell out a lot more, but it could also be a relatively small sponsorship compared to the $1.1M in spons…

No ill will towards the team, but isn’t it almost absurd that a CSS library is funded to the tune of 1m+ yearly and is still in financial difficulty? It is technically complete. There is no major research work or churn like in React, no monstruous complexity like Webpack.

Having worked on design system teams before people can burn a lot of time and money doing overly nuanced stuff. I have been in meetings discussing removing/adding a property on a React component before.

That said 3 motivated developers and a designer should be more than sufficient to build a css library, but you could 100% have a team of 20 and they would find stuff to do.

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#128

Post by wrs »

vehemenz wrote: post #121
spankalee wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CSS simply doesn't need a framework - there's no "from scratch". For humans or LLM authors. Tailwind is a lot of overhead conceptually and tooling wise to just not have to write classnames, and it's actually anti-modular.

Can you explain? Tailwind massively reduces overhead for abstraction, classing, documentation, and maintenance.

AFAICT, Tailwind is largely (not entirely) a different, shorter syntax for writing inline styles. (E.g., "class: 'bg-white'" = "style: 'background-color: white'".)

If you've rejected structural CSS to begin with, I sort of get the point that it saves a lot of typing; otherwise I don't see how it helps all that much over SASS or just modern plain CSS.

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#129

Post by slashdave »

spankalee wrote: post #39
northern-lights wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to be in Google's interest to keep Tailwind CSS afloat. Tailwind CSS is alive -> New / existing projects keep using Tailwind CSS -> more code for Gemini to train upon -> better and fancier UIs being created through Gemini -> popularity and usage of Gemini doesn't go down Of course this applies to any other LLM provider too but I guess Google saw this opportunity first.

I think it'd be better for AI and web dev if AIs generated real CSS instead. The supposed difficulty of tracking from elements to classes to rulesets is something that AIs can easily handle, and being able to change a ruleset once and have the update apply to all use sites is really good for AI-driven changes. Plus, humans and AIs won't have to wait for Tailwind to adopt new CSS features as they are added. If the AI…

The problem is training data. How many modern web sites use raw CSS?

Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS

#130

Post by bombcar »

throwaway-aws9 wrote: post #83
mdasen wrote: post #14

This is good, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Tailwind is out of the financial difficulty that we talked about yesterday. You can sponsor Tailwind for as little as $6,000/year. 29 companies were already sponsoring Tailwind including 16 companies at the $60,000/year level. Maybe Google AI Studio has decided to shell out a lot more, but it could also be a relatively small sponsorship compared to the $1.1M in spons…

The lesson here is to always offer a larger tier than what your largest subscribers have.

Yes, you should always have a "batshit insane" tier as someone, somewhere, has enough that it appears cheap.

This is why enterprise software is "call for pricing".

Post reply on HN