Building. Head of Design @GlueAI.
Chattanooga, TN
- Tweets 23,441
- Following 1,686
- Followers 1,702
- Likes 5,975
Design folks: what are your opinions, pros & cons of github.com/google-labs-code/…?
I'm thinking about this particular set of concerns and would love to have a conversation with anyone with opinions. DMs open.
1,155
Jason retweeted
A common dynamic I observe with AI: it feels most impressive when you don’t know much about the subject, don’t care or don’t have a clear idea of what the you want.
This applies across design, code, legal, and more. If I don’t know code very well, every piece of code it writes feels very impressive.
Once you know what something should feel or look like, it becomes almost impossible to guide AI there. And you definitely can’t one-shot it.
255
387
3,434
575,118
Jason retweeted
with this 100%. I think we undermine the practice and benefit of design if tools like cursor (or any vibe coding tool for that matter) are used to replace the left half of this chart.
That's where code can be used to created crazy dynamic experiments, big ideas, and start to get a idea for how something feels.
the problem is that they push back on be used to create massive upheavals, wildly diverging ideas, inversions of current app structures when used in prod.
yes, they are amazing once a problem has been defined and give designers a direct path to realization of ideas, but they don't allow for the freeform exploration that's where novel ideas are tried and tested. they can be a component in that process, a prototyping tool, but a great prototype should be able to be thrown away.
prototypes need to not scale, need to be unbound by performance, accessibility, and technical constraints. they should serve to expose those constrains because of the feedback, but also push against them, in case a constraint is just a facade or a legacy roadblock.
I love that cursor added these features, since it gives a way to reach into production and incrementally change or work visually within a real app environment, which is a part of design that has always relied on others. the last 10-20% of making things, or the tweaks that are only noticed after something is real.
But there's no way this type of workflow replaces the real meat of design, the ideation, exploration, bad ideas, random rabbit holes, and bulk of the "what if..." workflow. It can now be a part, but not the whole. not even close.
"same patterns, the same flows, the same ideas repeated across different tools and teams."
This is what I'm actually afraid of. When we start treating designers as code jugglers, and we start to see even more standardization in the space because everyone is building with the same primitives. Like why try to design or invest in designing something great when you can design and implement something standard in the same timeframe. This is the cookie cutter house of software design.
The more systematic designs tools are, they more systems will suffocate designers. Low fidelity, high fidelity, prototypes, code, all are tools and useful, but none of them is the end. Design is about exploring the problem space, finding a form. The code is kind of unnecessary in that process. Once you get to testing, prototyping or validating stage, the code are useful, because you're trying to refine and make the form to reality.
People are somehow obvious to the double diamond design process and that it exists there for a reason. When you jump in to the validation and implementation directly or try to collapse this in a single diamond, you lose something in the process.
These tools can be great for validating or prototyping the design explorations. So it's part of the process but not the whole process.
4
2
53
6,679
Jason retweeted
Quality first.
People should have a life outside of work. Place to enjoy life, develop their tastes, gather inspiration. When you feel better, your work is better. It naturally bleeds into what you make.
fastcompany.com/91445544/the…
20
73
1,121
391,852
Hey @figma folks — I don't think we ever need to see "Frame 09" any more. An AI generated name would be better than unnamed item in the layers panel, even if not perfect all the time.
644
Jason retweeted
The latest from @GlueAI just launched on Product Hunt - they’re all in on MCP and creating the first agentic team chat. Check it out.
Glue is live on @ProductHunt! If you are tired of noisy chat on data-locked platforms, check us out. We’re building AI-native team chat and we’d love your support! Link below 👇
3
1
13
3,182
Go check it out!
Now live on @ProductHunt! Show your support for AI-partnered, MCP-integrated, anti-channel-chaos team chat: na2.hubs.ly/H01vvRy0
5
342
It's a good day at @GlueAI! Today, we're announcing that we raised a $20M Series A.
We're digging deep into agentic team chat, working to build a world-class experience for you, your team, and all your tools to work together seamlessly.
glue.ai/blog/20m-to-build-ag…
1
3
17
1,538
Glue AI will take the context of the conversation, use Linear's MCP tools and create a new issue and return the link right to the thread. It's such a powerful way to move through your work day.
1
3
161
And this is only one example. With Glue AI and MCP, opportunities for these kinds of workflows are endless. I'm really excited to keep building here @GlueAI. Stay tuned for what comes next!
3
151
Jason retweeted
@GlueAI got featured in @axios!
I spoke with @danprimack about our Series A and what it means for the future of agentic team chat.
Link in the thread 👇
1
2
7
3,350