1006: Can AI Make Good Design?

欢迎来到《Syntax》。

Welcome to Syntax.

我们在Riverside上录的时候，开头二十秒左右丢了。

We lost the first, like, twenty seconds of this episode on Riverside.

所以我重新录一遍。

So I'm here recording it again.

我去找了我之前穿的那件衬衫。

I went to find the shirt that I was wearing.

我弄脏了它，上面沾了沙威玛薯条。

I spilled shawarma poutine on it, so it's dirty.

所以听好了。

So listen up.

我们会让剪辑师尽量精准地切进去，我就从头再说一遍我当时说的内容。

We're gonna get the editor to try cut it in perfectly, and I'm just gonna start saying what I was saying at the beginning of it.

今天我们聊的是AI设计，别急着关掉，这可不是那种说‘我以前试过这个，看着挺酷，我觉得设计师完蛋了’的AI设计节目。

We have a show on AI design, and don't turn it off just yet because this isn't the AI design show where guys are like, well, I once shot at this, but it looks amazing to me and I think designers are toast.

不是。

No.

这档节目不是这个意思。

That's not what this show is about.

这档节目想探讨的是，我们知道AI能写出不错的代码，这确实很棒，因为代码是高度确定性的。

This show is about, we know that AI can write pretty good code and and that's great because it's very deterministic.

可以测试，可以验证，诸如此类。

It's you can be tested, things like that.

但设计呢？一个模型能创造出既好用、功能实用、商业转化率高、真正帮到终端用户的东西吗？

But design, like, a model create something that is good, that is functionally useful, that converts well for the business, that helps the actual end user?

现在我们正处在一个很奇怪的阶段，好像人人都在互相抄袭。

We're in this like weird space right now where it seems like everybody is just ripping each other off.

每个应用看起来都一模一样，而且还有大量新工具在帮你做这件事。

Every app looks exactly the same and there's tons of new tools to help you.

所以为了搞清楚这个问题，我们打算试着回答以下几个关键问题。

So in order to get to the bottom of this, we're gonna attempt to answer some of the following questions.

AI能有创造力吗？

Can AI be creative?

它能激发你的创造力吗？

Can it make you creative?

好的设计能被推导出来吗？

Can good design be extrapolated?

用户体验呢？

What about user experience?

AI能做出好的用户体验吗？

Can AI make a good user experience?

它真的懂你界面里的那些细节吗？懂用户到底想干什么吗？

You know, does it know about all of the complexities of your UI of what people are trying to get done?

好的设计能被程序化吗？

Can you make good design programmatic?

我们以前好几期都聊过这个，比如，能靠程序自动选出好配色吗？

We've talked about this in the previous many episodes of like, can you programmatically pick good colors?

就像数学一样，这些东西其实很难掌握。

Like with math, those things are kind of hard to get to.

所以我们来回答这个问题。

So we'll answer that question.

AI能做出影响最终目标的设计吗？

Can I AI make design that influences the end goal?

比如让人买东西，或者帮用户顺利达成他们的使用目的。

So buying something, you know, or helping somebody get to the the end use.

归根结底，人们为什么要用你的应用？

Why are they using your application at the end of the day?

你能帮他们实现这个目标吗？

Can you help them with that?

最后，我们会聊聊工具和一些想法——不管你是不是设计师，想做设计的话，该关注哪些工具？

And then we're gonna end it off with just like tools and thoughts of if you want to design something, whether you're designer or not, what tools should you be looking at?

还有，该怎么正确地使用这些工具？

And and how should you be thinking about using these things?

我叫韦斯。

My name is Wes.

和往常一样，和我在一起的是斯科特·塔林斯基。

With me as always is mister Scott Talinski.

斯科特，你准备好开始了吗？

You're ready to get into it, Scott?

我太期待了。

Oh, I'm so ready to get into it.

这个话题我一直想很多，尤其是看到这么多由AI生成的设计时。

I this is a topic that I I think a lot about, especially given just how many how many vibe coded designs you see.

这简直太明显了。

And it's such a tell.

现在只要用过AI，就能看出痕迹，我甚至都能猜出韦斯用的是哪个模型设计的。

There's so many tells these days of once you've worked with AI, I can I feel like I could even tell Wes which model designed something at this point, which

是吗？

Yeah?

比如，GPT 和 Anthropic 有没有各自明显的特征？

Like, are specific tells for for GPT versus anthropic, etcetera.

所以我特别想听听你的看法。

So I I'm really interested to hear your thoughts on this.

不过话说回来。

But Yeah.

而且总的来说，设计这事儿我一直想提升，总觉得自己的水平还不够。

Also in general, man, design is something that I'm constantly looking to get better at and feel like I'm constantly not good enough at.

那咱们就开始吧。

So let's get into it.

我知道，大概

I know sort of

顺便说一句，很多建筑师一眼就能看出一栋建筑是用什么软件设计的，就看那些曲线是怎么拼接的。一旦某个工具更新了，所有建筑立马就带上那种风格，简直不可思议。

an aside from that, but I know that there are many architects which which can look at a building and say, know which software this building was designed in due to the way that the the curves fit together, you know, as soon as they add a new affiliate tool, and then all of the buildings have that which is absolutely crazy.

我觉得我老了以后，肯定会上《古董巡回鉴定》节目，说：‘没错，这个是用 Sonnet 4.6 做的，不是 4.5，你可能搞混了，哈哈。’

And I feel like I'm going be on antiques roadshow when I'm older being like, well, yes, that was that was done with sonnet four, five, not four, six, you might be a little confused, you know?

我都能一眼认出来，所以请继续

I'm be able to pick it out, so stay

关注后续。

tuned for that.

不过

But

我们来聊聊，对，左边边界

let's talk about like Yes, the border left

这很能代表当下的时代特征。

here is indicative of the era.

所以我才卷入这事儿，因为我每天都收到那些用AI胡乱拼凑代码的初创公司发来的邮件。

So I got onto this whole thing because I get these emails every single day from these, like, slop coded startups.

他们就说，嘿，你看看这个。

And they say, like, here, check it out.

还让我要是想用的话，随时跟他们说。

Like, let me know if you if if you wanna use it.

我总会点进去看看网站上到底是什么东西。

And I always click through to the website and see what it is.

结果每一家都一模一样。

And it's it's the same thing of everything.

对吧？

Right?

随便谁登录了 V0、Lovable、Cloud 之类的平台，输入一句‘帮我做个生意’，别出错，然后就直接吐出一个商业方案来。

Ever someone just logged into v zero or lovable or cloud or whatever and type like, make me a business, make no mistakes, and it shout out some business out the other end.

有意思的是，这些网站上我总看到同一个名字反复出现。

And what's interesting is that on all of these, I see the same name over and over again.

上面老是出现 Sarah Chen 这个名字。

I see Sarah Chen on there.

我就在想，这个 Sarah Chen 到底是从哪儿冒出来的？

And I was like, where is Sarah Chen coming from?

我心想，这事我得查个明白。

And I I was like, I gotta get to the bottom of this.

所以一开始，我心想，会不会是同一个人反复在这么做。

So first of all, I thought like, maybe this is just the same person doing this over and over again.

但后来发现并不是这样。

And it turns out that wasn't the case.

而是有很多不同的网站。

It was many websites.

于是我开始疑惑，这个Sarah Chen到底从哪儿冒出来的？

So I was like, where is Sarah Chen coming from?

会不会是某个网站搭建平台，预设了一个模板，里面用了Sarah Chen当用户评价，然后到处套用？

Like, maybe it's coming from, like, one of these, like, site builders, you know, maybe they have, like, seeded it with a template that has Sarah Chen as a testimonial and just uses that.

我查了一下，发现也不是这么回事，因为我找到的所有例子，去GitHub上一看，过去一年里‘Sarah Chen’的使用量直接飙升了。

And I looked into it and it didn't seem to be the case because all of the examples that I had found, I looked on GitHub and the use of Sarah Chen in the last year has just skyrocketed.

而且这些案例还来自不同的生成器。

And and they were all from like different generators, you know.

有的甚至是在PHP代码里出现的。

Some of it was in like PHP code.

有的还出现在 Markdown 文档和 PowerPoint 演示文稿里。

Some of it was in like markdown documents and PowerPoint slides.

这些地方之间根本看不出有什么共同点。

There there didn't seem to be any commonality between them all.

最后我干脆去问了 ChatGPT，让它给我列五个随机的客户评价。

So finally, went into chat GPT and I said, give me a list of like five random testimonials.

不是随机的，是五个客户评价。

They're not random, five testimonials.

结果 Sarah Chen，第一个就出来了。

And Sarah Chen, bam, first one.

我又试了其他所有模型，几乎每个都把 Sarah Chen 放在第一位，而且后面还时不时冒出她的变体，简直不可思议。

And I went into every other model and every single one had either I think four out of five had Sarah Chen as the first and then somewhere in there, had a variation of Sarah Chen in there, which was absolutely wild.

每个模型都在用 Sarah Chen 作为默认例子。

So every single model is using Sarah Chen as it.

我当时就想，如果你以为 AI 能让你更有创意，那你就想错了。

And and I I thought like, if you think AI is is making you creative, it's it's not.

它让你变得像……程序化地……那个……那个……我刚才说的那个词叫什么来着？

It's making you like what programmatically what what what did I what was I saying it was called?

等一下。

Hold on.

对。

Yeah.

你是说它让你变得概率化，或者说更有可能性。

You're it's making you probable or likely.

我得问问，你是怎么注意到莎拉·陈的？

I gotta ask how how did you notice Sarah Chen?

因为对我来说，我的大脑对 Yeah。

Because for me, my brain Yeah.

直接略过那些内容了。

Just glosses over that stuff.

你知道，我注意到它的时候，是因为看到我的好朋友韦斯在上面。

You know, the times that I don't are when I see my good buddy Wes up there.

我就在想，

I'm like,

嘿，那是Wes。

hey, that's Wes.

他身上有股Wes的劲儿。

He's got a little Wes.

不过我觉得我可能

Well, like like the But I don't think I

根本不会注意到下雨的事儿

would have noticed any rain

或者这个人给我发邮件，说他们是家公司。

or this guy emailed me and says like, hey, we are a business.

我于是去看了他的网站，上面写着Sarah Chen。

And then I like go to his website and it says Sarah Chen.

然后明显是个AI生成的照片。

And then there's like a obviously an AI photo.

我当时就想，这根本不是Sarah Chen。

I And was like, that's not Sarah Chen.

于是我搜了一下。

And so I googled it.

结果还真的有另一个。

It there was another one.

一直冒出来的那个人叫Marcus Rodriguez。

It was like, Marcus Rodriguez was the one the other one that kept showing up.

我就搜了Marcus Rodriguez加客户评价，真不是开玩笑。

So I I googled Marcus Rodriguez and testimonial, and I found I'm not kidding.

我大概找到了两三百个网站，都用他当案例。

I probably found two or 300, like startups.coms that had him as a thing.

而且很多情况下，他所关联的公司名称也一模一样。

And in in many cases, his like attribution of the well, company he's associated with was also the same.

都是什么信息技术公司之类的。

It was like info tech or something like that.

所以我只是随便搜了一下，就发现了这个Marcus Rodriguez。

So I like just by googling it, I found like, man, this Marcus Rodriguez.

而且旁边总是反复出现Sarah Chen的名字。

And then beside it was always Sarah Chen was used over and over and over again.

所以这纯粹是

So it's just

有规律可循的。

deterministic.

对吧？

Right?

你有没有回复那个……

Did you did you respond to the did.

对方问了你，Sarah。

Asked

你，Sarah。

you, Sarah.

我一开始还以为是发现了什么垃圾信息团伙之类的，想着干脆潜入进去看看。

I first thought like, Oh, I'm on to some like slop ring, you know, and I'm gonna I'm gonna infiltrate the slop ring.

所以我给他发了封邮件。

So I emailed him.

我就说，嘿，

I was like, Hey,

咱们能

can we

我们能通个电话吗？

can we jump on a call?

我很想就这个话题做一期语法节目。

I would love to do a syntax episode on this.

他说，好的，没问题。

And he's like, Yeah, absolutely.

我们现在就聊聊吧。

Let's talk right now.

后来我才明白，根本不是什么口水圈。

And then I realized like, No, it's not a slobbering.

只是大家都用同一个李莎的证言而已。

It's just that everybody's using the same Sarah Chen testimonial.

我觉得这简直就是欺骗。

So I feel like I feel I feel like that is fraud.

这算欺骗吗？

That is fraud?

是的。

Yes.

当然算。

Oh, absolutely.

我会说这属于欺诈。

Would say that is fraud.

没错。

Yes.

是的

Yeah.

这太离谱了。

That's crazy.

所以我想说的是，AI能让你更有创造力吗？

So all of that to say like, can AI make you creative?

如果你指望它替你完成所有创作，做出漂亮、有创意的东西，那根本不可能。

I think like if you are expecting it to do all of the work of making you something beautiful, something creative, something that goes into whatever, it's not gonna happen.

对吧？

Right?

我觉得它确实能帮你通过Mad CSS网站探索各种想法。

I think that it can certainly help you explore ideas with the mad CSS website.

对吧？

Right?

我们以前有过一些特别傻的、九十年代风格的篮球视频。

We we had these like super silly, like nineties basketball So same.

有人问我们有没有拍过那些照片，当然没有。

Photos, which one person asked if we'd like, took those, which was like, of course not.

我们又没穿越回九十年代去拍什么大学篮球的照片。

We those are we didn't travel back to the nineties and take like NCAA photos.

我身高才一米七，但要说像那样扣篮，我肯定能做到。

And and me at my my, you know, massive height of five foot seven, I I can certainly dunk like that.

那当然了。

You best believe.

我在蹦床上是挺厉害，但像那样可不行。

I am good on the trampoline, but not that Yeah.

设计那东西的时候，我试了大概二十到三十种不同的方案。

But when I was designing that thing, I went through, I don't know, probably like 20 or 30 different like iterations of what we could do.

它确实帮我探索了各种不同的方向。

And it it certainly helped me explore different I I areas.

我觉得AI能帮你在这一点上做得更好。

And I think that AI can help you do that.

但归根结底，它并不是在产生新点子。

But at the end of the day, it's not coming up with with new ideas.

它所有的东西都是基于以前做过的内容训练出来的，这倒也不一定是坏事。

It's all been trained on stuff that has been done before, which is maybe not necessarily a bad thing.

但我认为它并没有真正让你变得有创造力。

But I don't think it's actually making you creative.

它只是把一切搅和成一锅黏糊糊的烂粥。

And it's just making everything some disgusting warm stew.

就是把所有以前用过的点子、所有被训练过的东西全混在一起。

That is just all of the ideas that have been done before all of the stuff has been trained on.

结果就成了这种平庸、稀释过的版本。

And it's all sort of just this mediocre sort of watered down version of that.

但那些能做出很棒设计的工具呢？

But what about these design tools that create really good?

天哪。

My gosh.

这个我们待会儿再聊。

Well, we'll talk about that.

就像你看到的，很多设计工具都能做出看起来挺像样的网站。

Because like you, you see a lot of these design tools that put out seemingly decent looking websites.

这个我们一会儿再详细说。

We'll talk about that in just a sec.

咱们先聊聊YouTube的缩略图吧。

But let's talk about YouTube thumbnails for a second.

最新的Gemini能轻松生成那种MrBeast风格的缩略图，高动态范围、高ISO，所有那些典型的YouTube缩略图套路，它全都能搞定。

The latest Gemini can crank out a like a mister beast style thumbnail, which is like super high high HDR, it widens ISO, it does all the like stupid YouTube thumbnail stuff that like we do it as well.

对吧？

Right?

为什么呢？

Because why?

因为管用啊。

Because it works.

对吧？

Right?

但现在，你只要打几个字，它就能生成过去你得花几百美元请设计师做的那种封面图。

But now that it they're able to just simply you can just type type type, and it cranks out what you used to pay hundreds of dollars for to a designer for this type of thumbnail.

现在YouTube上的每个封面图都长这样。

Now everybody, every single thumbnail is like that on YouTube.

对吧？

Right?

就是那种夸张的表情，全都一样。

It's the the wow face, all of that.

蓝色还是红色，中间一条线，上面大字标题。

It's the the the blue versus red, the thing down the middle, big letters on top.

这些现在都成了基本配置。

That is now table stakes.

我觉得这些基本配置很快就会失效，可能再过两三周就不管用了。

And I think that now that is table stakes, it's going to stop working in the next two or three weeks.

我敢说，因为现在人人都明白了，以前这种设计得靠像MrBeast那样的人专门请人来做。

I guarantee you because everyone has figured out, oh, I don't need to like, previously, it was somebody like mister beast.

他们团队里有人专门研究这些模板。

They had somebody on staff figuring out these.

后来别人才开始模仿。

And then other people started to copy those.

现在呢？只要打个提示词，几秒钟就生成了。

And now it's simply just like a prompt away.

结果现在每个封面都长一个样。

And every single thumbnail looks like that.

可正因为人人都能做，这招马上就不灵了。

Now it's gonna stop working because it's table stakes.

谁都能轻松搞定。

Everybody can do it.

对吧？

Right?

现在我们得确保YouTube缩略图会转向另一种风格了。

And now we're gonna have to guarantee we're gonna see like a shifting of YouTube thumbnails to something else.

我不确定那会是什么，但迟早会看到变化。

And I don't know what that something else is, but we will see.

对。

Yeah.

我知道YouTube缩略图本身就是一个大话题。

I know it's a YouTube thumbnails are a whole thing in general.

就拿那个惊讶的表情来说吧。

Even like thinking about that wow face.

我不喜欢那种惊讶脸，但它确实有效，我来告诉你为什么有效。

I hate the wow face, but it works and I'll tell you why it works.

这跟心理学有关。

It's psychology.

人对人脸和表情的敏感度，远高于对文字或普通图片的反应。

People recognize faces and expressions better than they recognize text or images like that.

所以这些脸虽然我不喜欢，也很难看，但确实有效

So the faces work even though I hate them and they're ugly,

但我们不得不这么做

but we gotta do it.

接下来的问题是，好的设计能不能被推广开来？

The next question here is, can good design be extrapolated?

意思是，如果你给它一组例子、一套规则、颜色、间距、字体之类的全部信息。

Meaning that if you were to provide it with a list of examples, a list of rules, colors, spacing, type, all of that stuff.

如果你打下一个良好的设计基础，它能不能被扩展应用到更大的范围？

If you sort of make a good base of design, can it then be extrapolated into to something larger?

我觉得在一定程度上，是可以的。

And I I think partially, yes.

我们现在看到的工具，比如谷歌的Stitch，就是这样的，你进去告诉它你想要什么。

That's what we're seeing now with tools like Google Stitch, where you go into it and you you tell it what you want.

对我来说，有帮助的做法是，我让Claude帮我总结所有功能、所有布局，以及所有需要完成的事情，但不描述它们看起来是什么样子。

And in my case, I found what was helpful is I asked Claude to summarize all of the features and all of the the layouts and whatever that needs to happen without describing what it looks like.

然后我把那段文字复制粘贴到 Google Stitch 里，它就生成了一个看起来还不错的界面。

And then I took that copy pasted that into Google stitch and it cranked out like a decent looking design.

但用个三四次之后，你就能明显看出来，他们背后已经内置了不少优质内容。

But after using it three or four times, you can clearly tell that they have have seeded it with some good stuff.

对吧？

Right?

他们有一大堆模板。

They have a whole bunch of templates.

他们有一大堆不错的字体。

They have a whole bunch of good fonts.

他们有一整套关于配色搭配的规则，知道哪些颜色放在一起好看。

They have a whole bunch of rules about what colors work well with each other.

他们很可能有一个庞大的提示库，里面全是‘这些设计看起来才对’的范例。

They probably have a massive prompt of like, these are the things that look good.

然后你作为用户，就可以说：好吧，我想要它实现这个效果，对吧？

And then out the other end, you you the user can say, alright, well, I want it to to do this, right?

我需要表单输入框、滑块之类的元素。

I need form inputs or sliders or all that stuff.

然后我想用这些颜色。

Then I want to use these colors.

它就能把这些东西整合起来，生成一个看起来还过得去的设计。

And then it can it can take those things and sort of extrapolate that into something that is looking half decent.

但就算它上线了一个月两个月，我现在一眼就能认出谷歌缝纫机的设计，因为用久了，所有设计都开始变得一模一样。

But even after it's been out for what, like a month or two, I can now eyeball one of these Google stitch designs, no problem, because they all start to look the same after after a while.

我觉得这其实挺贴切的，尤其是在开发方面，很多情况下——

I think that goes along very nicely, and nicely in a sense where, like, even with development, a lot

很多人都觉得AI在全新项目里特别有用。

of people feel like AI is really helpful in greenfield in general.

但我发现它最有用的时候，其实是处理那些已经成型的模式，比如重复之前做过的任务，或者重新实现同样的模式。

But the times where I find it to be the most helpful are with established patterns, taking care of tasks that you is like mostly just regurgitating either patterns that you've already done or reimplementing those same patterns.

但如果没有这些现成的模式，它自己瞎搞的话，效果就差远了。

But without those established patterns left to its own devices, it's way less effective.

所以我觉得，好的设计延伸其实也属于这类既有模式，就是基于明确的规则来扩展这些模式，比如在写 CSS 的时候，没有批准就不能新增 CSS 变量之类的。

So I think extrapolating good design to me falls under that same category of established patterns and extrapolating on those established patterns with hard rules about how to extrapolate on those patterns, I e, you know, especially when you get into CSS stuff, whether that is like not adding new new CSS VARs without approval, etcetera.

现在肯定有人在电台那边喊了：这不就是设计系统吗，你这都不懂。

And there's probably people screaming at the the radio right now being like, that's what a design system is, you dummy.

其实早在 AI 出现之前，我们就已经有这种东西了——一套由规则和组件构成的体系，可以拼搭起来用。

And like, we've had this before we've had AI, and that is a system of rules and pieces that you can sort of put together.

但这种体系也有它的局限性。

But there there is a limit to it as well.

对吧？

Right?

我们以前有 Bootstrap，现在有 SHADCN，这些东西开箱即用，效果都不错。

Because like we had Bootstrap, we had have SHAD CN, and those things look really good out of the box.

但到了某个阶段，你就没法像搭乐高一样随便拼接了。

But at a certain point, you can't just click them together like they're Lego.

你得有点更高级的东西才行。

You have to have a little something that is a little bit higher.

你得能自己琢磨出来。

You have to be able to figure it out.

对。

Yeah.

我下一个观点是，AI能做出好的用户体验吗？

That's what my next point is, is can AI make a good UX?

但在谈这个之前，我们先简单聊聊这个设计。

But before we get into that, let's talk real quick about this like design.

嗯。

Md.

所以这个东西，你能不能简单解释一下它是什么？

So this is a do you wanna give a quick explanation of what it is?

是的。

Yeah.

那它到底是什么？

So what is it?

几周前，谷歌发布了他们的设计规范。

Like a couple weeks ago, Google came out with their design.

MD规范，这个设计的核心理念就是把所有内容集中起来。

Md spec, which the idea for the design.

MD规范的意思是，你把设计相关的所有东西都放在一起。

Md spec is that you are putting it.

它有点像你代码库里的agents.md这类指导文档，只不过专门用于设计模式。

It's kind of like your agents.md or any of these steering documents that you have inside of your code base, but only for design patterns.

我第一次看到Design.MD的时候，

And when I first saw design.

我仔细看了下，其实就是个带前端元数据的Markdown文件，里面记录了你的设计令牌和属性。

MD, I was looking at it and it's basically what it's a markdown file with front matter about your design tokens, your properties.

它不只是个Markdown文件，还自带解析器和检查工具。

It's a parser as well and like a linter.

它比单纯的Markdown文件结构严谨得多，不过你说得对。

It is a lot more structured than just a markdown file, but you're right,

这其实是一个指导性文档。

it is a steering document.

对。

Right.

而且它确实也有这些方面，对吧？

And so there are those aspects of it too, right?

这个文档里还包含验证机制。

Where there is validation involved in this document.

但说实话，我第一眼看到的时候，觉得这简直就是根CSS声明。

But it is really in my my initial reaction was like, this this looks like just the root CSS declaration.

是的。

Yeah.

里面的内容当然更多，但感觉这正是Drift大显身手的地方——把代码里已经表达过的概念再重复一遍。

There are more things in here, but it feels like prime territory for Drift for kind of it's like duplication of ideas that are expressed in code already.

但核心想法是，你的AI会把这个当作一个设计文档来用。

But the idea is is that your AI uses this as essentially a design document.

这是这个库的规范。

This is the rules of this library.

如果你要往里加设计，就得遵守这些规矩。

If you're adding design to this, it's following these dang rules.

不管是颜色、字体，还是命名方式、元素归属、间距这些，这里都列出了不能做的事。

Whether that is the colors, fonts, all that stuff, the naming of things, what belongs to what, what the spacing are Here's a don't.

圆角间距。

Rounded corner spacing.

没错，再说一遍。

Again, yeah.

我还是不太明白，为什么非得有这个东西，不过……

I still don't necessarily get it, get the need for it, but

我觉得关键在于，这是一种能跨平台通用的标准。

I I think the big play here is that, like, it's a standard that can be translated between things.

比如，你用 Figma 的话，当然可以。

So, like, if you have a Figma Sure.

它是

It's

一个可以输出这种东西的系统，就像 Tailwind 一样，能在这两者之间互相转换。

a that can output this, and then, like, you have, like, like a tailwind, it can be converted from one to another.

但首先，我想问，我们真需要这么死板的规定吗？

But, first of all, I wonder like, do we do we need this rigidness?

其次，如果非得这么死板，我觉得还不如直接在 CSS 文件里写注释来得方便。

And second of all, I say, if there is rigidity, I feel like I would rather do this in like a CSS file with comments, maybe?

我特别希望，虽然知道这不太可能，但能有一种标准方式来定义 CSS 变量，因为这本质上就是这么回事。

I would love, I know this is not gonna happen, I would love a standard way of just defining CSS variables because that's really kind of what this is.

比如间距、基础值这些，干脆在根元素的 CSS 声明里统一命名，加点注释说明整体逻辑，搞定，这样就不用再让设计文档和代码文档各自为政、容易脱节了。

Because like spacing, grounded, all that stuff, just come up with a standardized name for all this stuff in your root CSS declaration, point it there, some comments about the overview or whatever, bingo bingo, now you're not having a AI document and a code document that could get out

了，是的。

of Yeah.

偏差真让人头疼。

Drift kills me.

我觉得在这方面还有另一种情况，比如像Salesforce这样的公司，他们的设计有四十种不同的实现方式。

I think there's there's a different world for this as well, where the whole design tokens folks, you know, where you you're Salesforce and you have 40 different implementations of your design.

但我很好奇，这种做法有没有真正被广泛采用。

But I'm curious to see if there's any any uptake.

我绝对不希望我的代码仓库根目录里又多出一个文件。

I certainly don't want another file in my root of my repo.

是啊。

Oh, yeah.

对吧？

Right?

我的代码仓库根目录里再加一个文件。

Another another root of my repo.

没错。

Yeah.

下一个问题是，AI能做出好的用户体验吗？

The next one is can AI make good UX?

设计远不止是让它看起来好看。

So much of design is is not just making it look good.

关键是做出一致的界面，有明确的目的，让用户用起来顺手。

It's it's about making interface that is consistent, something that has clear purpose, low friction to the user.

对吧？

Right?

说实话，我觉得AI在这方面的表现并不怎么样。

And quite honestly, I don't think AI is very good at this.

它很擅长往页面上堆按钮。

I think it's great at throwing buttons on there.

它也擅长做卡片，再把卡片套进卡片里。

I think it's good at, having cards and putting cards inside of cards.

但当涉及到我们这个特定的应用，我们只做这一件事的时候。

But when it comes down to this is our specific app and we are doing this one thing.

对吧？

Right?

比如预订功能，对吧。

Like, are booking Mhmm.

预告片。

Trailers.

是的。

Yeah.

我们是U-Haul。

We are U Haul.

这或许是个不错的例子。

That maybe that's a good example.

我简直讨厌U-Haul。

I freaking hate U Haul.

U-Haul的App糟糕透了。

U Haul's app is absolutely awful.

用户体验差到让我想放弃一切。

The UX is I won't, makes me wanna kill myself.

而且简直糟透了。

And it just the worst.

我实在

I don't

你觉得这么说合适吗？

think you could say that.

这么说。

Could say.

拜托了，真的拜托了。

Please, please.

这个用户体验让我想死。

UX makes me want to die.

而且真的快把我逼疯了。

And it just, it drives me nuts.

对吧？

Right?

那里需要的是，一个真正懂用户体验的设计师介入，弄清楚现在实际在发生什么，然后重新设计界面和整个租用U-Haul拖车的流程。

And what needs to happen there is that a designer that understands UX needs to come in and understand what is actually getting done here and figure out both the interface as well as the flow for for actually booking a trailer on U Haul.

对吧？

Right?

我不确定，如果你把这些难题交给AI，它真能做出好东西，因为它根本理解不了这些事。

And I don't know that if you were to give AI these problems, it that it would make a good thing because it just really doesn't understand.

也许你可以收集大量用户反馈，整理汇总一下，但那也有限度。

Maybe you could take a whole bunch of user feedback, and like and pipe that in and summarize it and stuff.

但我觉得，到某个阶段，你还是得靠真正懂行、有好审美的人来做，不然最后出来的界面肯定惨不忍睹。

But I think at a certain point, you still need somebody who understands the stuff and has a good UX because it's just you're gonna get these awful interfaces at the end of the day.

是的。

Yeah.

我发现AI做的大部分用户体验工作，就算你设了严格的规则，甚至从什么技能库下载个UX插件，装到系统里，疯狂提示它‘让界面更友好’，结果还是不行。

I find most of the UX work that AI does, even with strict rules and you can download a UX skill from skills whatever, that malware, and throw it on your system and prompt away, make this UX more user friendly.

说白了，就是差得离谱。

And like, it just flat out is bad as that.

是的。

Yeah.

我心里明明有很明确的用户体验规范，可它还是搞不好。

There like, I have such strict UX rules in mind and it's still just like falters with that.

我老是忍不住想说：你别插手了，让我来。

I I always I find I find myself saying move move out of the way.

是的。

Yeah.

让我来处理吧。

I let me do it.

比以往任何时候都更需要。

Like, way more than ever in

我觉得这些事很大程度上其实很主观。

I these even think that just like so much of that is just subjective.

你知道的。

You know?

哎，这纯粹是个人品味问题。

Like, oh, I'm It's taste.

我特别讨厌这种‘品味’的说法，但说实话，确实有道理。

I hate that like taste thing so much, but yeah, it makes sense.

总得有人来定调，这其实就是品味问题。

It's just like somebody needs to It's taste.

你用这个东西的时候，就会想：诶，你知道吗？

Use this thing and go, oh, you know what?

当我选好地点后，发现拖车没空，系统应该有个很好的体验提示我：附近另一个地方有类似的拖车，或者这个地点有另一辆差不多的可以选。

When I selected my location and then the trailer wasn't available, there should be a very good UX for being able to realize, oh, there is a similar trailer at a different place nearby or there are this is a trailer that I could get that is similar at this location.

而且，真的，这里面门道太多了。

And, yeah, there's just there's so much to it.

我觉得这用户体验太差了。

Not good at UX IMO.

所以如果你让AI来设计你的应用，你肯定得用Sentry，为什么呢？

So, if you have AI designing your app, you're gonna wanna make sure that you have Sentry because why?

他们有愤怒点击检测功能，因为当AI设计出糟糕的用户体验时，用户会不停地点击各种地方，心里想：这东西怎么不工作？

They have rage click detection because when AI designs your crappy user experience, users are going to be clicking on stuff and being like, doesn't this work right?

或者：为什么这功能跟我预期的不一样？

Or why isn't this doing what I'm expecting it to?

然后你就能在Sentry的仪表盘里看到这些报告，清楚地知道是谁遇到了问题。

And then you're going to get those reports in your dashboard in Sentry and you're going to be able to see exactly who's having issues.

你还可以收集用户反馈，当他们觉得这东西可能很烂的时候。

You can also collect user feedback for when users feel like this thing might suck.

这里还有很多其他很棒的功能，比如监控服务中断，以及追踪你那堆乱七八糟代码里的错误。

There's a lot of great stuff here too, like outages and being able to track errors from your slop coded mess.

去sentry.forward/syntax注册，使用优惠码tasty treat，免费用两个月。

Check it out at sentry.forward slash syntax sign up to get two months for free using the coupon code tasty treat.

相信我，这工具绝对有用。

Trust me, this is a tool that is going to Definitely.

你每次

You at every single