3 ms·

Take this website for example. https://www.adaline.ai/ https://www.adaline.ai/ Some vibe coder saw nothing wrong with this. This is the future of the web.

oc1 1y ago
what's wrong with that?
- s_ting765 1y ago
  Open the network tab on F12. Or for giggles try accessing that UI from mobile.
  - oc1 1y ago
    365 requests 77.2 MB transferred 79.8 MB resources Finish: 5.71 s I'm impressed it took only 6 seconds. Would hire.
- Popeyes 1y ago
  I mean that's the kind of website I would have been done by Flash and I would played around for ages on. Now it's just stupid scroll jacking and poor HTML.
Waterluvian 1y ago
Frankly I think it's badass that people can author such incredibly rich and different websites. We truly are spoiled with choice.
- s_ting765 1y ago
  I disagree. It's badass, revolutionary even, to communicate with simple html, javascript and css in 2025!
  - Cthulhu_ 1y ago
    Both is good. The linked page is a marketing page built to impress. The OP is an content page built to inform. Sometimes you want marketing pages built to inform [0]; sometimes you want content pages to impress [1]. It's always a tradeoff, but I can guarantee that your idealism doesn't correlate with harsh reality. [0] https://aws.amazon.com/s3/ https://aws.amazon.com/s3/ [1] https://ciechanow.ski/ https://ciechanow.ski/
    - s_ting765 1y ago
      That adaline.ai link is not just a marketing page. If you had scrolled further down this would be immediately clear to you. And even if it was a purely marketing page, it would have missed the mark by a long shot. My idealism of what a good website ought to look like or how it should communicate doesn't have to correlate to reality for my opinion to be valid.
motorest 1y ago
> Some vibe coder saw nothing wrong with this. What do you think is wrong with the site?
vntok 1y ago
Why would you think it is bad? The website cost next to nothing but a bit of prompting time, it loads almost instantly on my 2021 smartphone while on network broadband (4G), it uses parallelism extensively to optimize perfs with cascade loads, it is very responsive, and it's objectively quite nice to the eye.

oc1 1y ago

what's wrong with that?

s_ting765 1y ago
Open the network tab on F12. Or for giggles try accessing that UI from mobile.
- oc1 1y ago
  365 requests 77.2 MB transferred 79.8 MB resources Finish: 5.71 s I'm impressed it took only 6 seconds. Would hire.
Popeyes 1y ago
I mean that's the kind of website I would have been done by Flash and I would played around for ages on. Now it's just stupid scroll jacking and poor HTML.

Waterluvian 1y ago

Frankly I think it's badass that people can author such incredibly rich and different websites. We truly are spoiled with choice.

s_ting765 1y ago
I disagree. It's badass, revolutionary even, to communicate with simple html, javascript and css in 2025!
- Cthulhu_ 1y ago
  Both is good. The linked page is a marketing page built to impress. The OP is an content page built to inform. Sometimes you want marketing pages built to inform [0]; sometimes you want content pages to impress [1]. It's always a tradeoff, but I can guarantee that your idealism doesn't correlate with harsh reality. [0] https://aws.amazon.com/s3/ https://aws.amazon.com/s3/ [1] https://ciechanow.ski/ https://ciechanow.ski/
  - s_ting765 1y ago
    That adaline.ai link is not just a marketing page. If you had scrolled further down this would be immediately clear to you. And even if it was a purely marketing page, it would have missed the mark by a long shot. My idealism of what a good website ought to look like or how it should communicate doesn't have to correlate to reality for my opinion to be valid.

motorest 1y ago

> Some vibe coder saw nothing wrong with this. What do you think is wrong with the site?

vntok 1y ago

Why would you think it is bad? The website cost next to nothing but a bit of prompting time, it loads almost instantly on my 2021 smartphone while on network broadband (4G), it uses parallelism extensively to optimize perfs with cascade loads, it is very responsive, and it's objectively quite nice to the eye.