It is probably cheaper than update the models to use something else instead of tailwind
Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
281–290 of 319 posts
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
lol People don't realize that Tailwind democratized styling for a lot of people who didn't want to or didn't know how to write CSS. We're not going back to writing hand-crafted CSS with or without LLMs. LLMs, by their nature, work better with Tailwind since it needs a much smaller context to make the right decision.
> We're not going back to writing hand-crafted CSS with or without LLMs. A lot of us have never stopped writing hand-crafted CSS. Also, in my experience, Gemini 3 Pro is an absolute monster at writing layouts and styling in pure CSS with very basic descriptions of what I want (tested it while I was experimenting with vibe coding in some sleepless night LOL). There are still a lot of developers who loathe using Tailwi…
I apologize, I was being a bit hyperbolic.
I spent a decent amount of time working in marketing and ad agencies, and there are absolutely still needs for custom CSS in that area, so I agree.
I was more pushing back against the idea that Tailwind will be replaced by vanilla CSS because of LLMs.
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
companies are suddenly sponsoring tailwind just for marketing
I don't care if they're sponsoring it because they made a deal with the devil. It doesn't change the outcome for Tailwind or me.
The source of the support doesn’t change the outcome? It’s like you’ve never even heard of enshittification!
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#284too little too late, the open source is already littered with corpses of starved developers.
unless there's companies like google actively going out of their way supporting open source projects, this is just optics.
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#285Earlier 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
There's a whole lot more, check `third_party/` if you work at Google. (disclaimer, used to work at google a long time ago)
There were directories there for sure, but I honestly never saw anything get used from there (except I think TensorFlow was in there?).
My personal experience was I never used any OSS code (that wasn't Google Open Sourcing its own code) except Linux & LLVM.
It definitely didn't feel meaningful to the company besides the ones I called out.
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#286Earlier 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
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.
I don't think the company would be very different if these projects had never existed and everyone had to pay for proprietary tools.
The people meaningfully benefiting from open source are the people and companies on the margin, not the biggest tech companies in the world.
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just about everyone uses component-specific styles Yeah. At which point you can simply use e.g Tailwind.
What component-specific styles look like: class="menu-item" Styles-in-HTML (Tailwind): class="m-4 mb-2 p-2 border border-radius-sm border gray-200 hover:border-gray-300 font-sm sm:font-xs [...]" You can be completely insensitive to or unbothered by the difference, but that doesn't mean they're equivalent.
I'm not saying they're equivalent. I'm saying that the latter is better, especially in the context of reviewing LLM output.
With the former, I need to cross-reference two different stacks (HTML and CSS) and construct a mental model every time I move between components. With the latter, I can simply look at one output (HTML) and move on with my life, knowing that the chances of conflicts/issues/etc are fairly limited.
You guys are advocating for keeping the semantic separation that we originally aimed for with HTML/CSS, but in an LLM world this is yet another distinction that probably "does not matter".
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#288Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#289Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the most popular UI system (especially for AI models) Like others earlier in the thread I'm symphatetic to this company/project, but your code/project being referenced often in AI output in itself doesn't imply that the thing needs to be a business. bash, curl, awk, Python code with numpy imports, C++, all sorts of code is constantly being generated by AI, doesn't mean curl or numpy should be its own company, or th…
> doesn't mean curl or numpy should be its own company, or that the AI Labs need to fund them. you'd be surprised https://numpy.org/about/#sponsors https://curl.se/sponsors.html
Great point, thanks for making it. Following onward, NumPy has a non-profit called Numfocus who is behind it:
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/454...
Apparently they have an annual budget of ~$10M. From the contributors, it's easy to recognize the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (so Meta), Google, MSFT. This is great.
Having said that, I'd still say that $1-2M for a CSS library seems more than enough. Not everything needs to be "scaled"..