Matt D. Smith and others argue AI tools work best when you have a clear vision first. They warn against low-effort prompts and copying existing designs without thought, showing how intentional use beats treating AI as a shortcut.
Sometimes it can be really cool to just be really into something. Like, I was just. For whatever reason, I can't get these.
Pixel things out of my mind. I'm like, I'm going to design.
20 pixel icons. Like, what if I could make these with JavaScript? What if they were.
Interactive, you know, and just kind of like, let your own curiosity kind of lead that?
And it's more like, I'm. I am using this as a tool versus generate me the best website you've ever seen.
Yeah, I love that point. And I'm even just going to underline it because there's so much of the discourse that I see is like, well, these tools just produce slop. And it's like, no, they produce whatever you want them to produce. Yeah. Like, and come up with some kind of an idea and, like, you can bring it to life.
You know, they will produce slop if you're trying.
To one shot a website. Which is a sloppy prompt.
Exactly.
And so I think. I like to. I like to think of them as, you know, it's like.
A hammer. You're not going to swing a hammer.
And accidentally.
Build your dream home. Your dream home's.
Gonna come from your vision of, like, how many bedrooms, how many bathrooms? Is it one story?
Is it two? You know, what is the site? Is it siding? Is it stucco? You know, there are.
People taking pictures of websites that they really love being.
Like, you know, build me this.
And it's like, oh, my gosh, I one shotted this thing. Designers are cooked.
It's like, well, you did just plagiarize.
This entire website.
That somebody else made. So, you.
Know, I think it just helps to have some vision and just sense that, okay, I'm going to use.
This tool to help me achieve a certain goal.
