I work with a design system, and lately I ve been thinking about what happens when AI starts using it too.

Giving AI our components, tokens, and patterns sounds ideal. It makes the output much closer to something we could actually use.

But there s a tradeoff I m not sure about.

A design system is based on decisions we ve already made. If AI always follows those decisions perfectly, it may also keep repeating the same solutions, even when a new problem could benefit from something different.

One small UX decision I run into in product design is whether a product should remember what the user selected last time.

Filters, view modes, selected projects, table settings. Remembering these choices can save users from repeating the same setup every time they come back.

But it can also create confusion.

A user returns days later, sees a different result than expected, and doesn t realize an old setting is still being applied.

Hey everyone,

As a first-time founder gearing up for my first launch, I found myself getting overwhelmed by all the moving parts. To keep my sanity, I started building out a super-detailed checklist.

Every top athlete has one (Lebron James, Novak Djokovic, Serena Williams). And it turns out, so do most of the biggest names in tech.

Steve Jobs mentored Mark Zuckerberg in the early days of Facebook. Eric Schmidt mentored Larry Page and Sergey Brin at Google and later credited that relationship as one of the key reasons Google scaled the way it did. Bill Campbell, known as "the Coach of Silicon Valley," mentored Jobs, Schmidt, Jeff Bezos, and dozens of other founders throughout his career.

I went through YC as a solo founder and I'm 6 years in now. I sometimes wonder whether I'd go solo again if I started a new company.

The good parts are obvious. No cofounder conflict, fast decisions, all the equity.

I ve been building AI systems for a few years, and one question keeps getting harder as agents become more capable:

Where should the human actually stay in the loop?

Traditional professions like doctors, judges, and the like need specialised academic guidance (certificate) + experience. I agree.

But what about technical and humanities? So far, everyone has argued that a university will bring contacts (I'm not arguing, that's true... but the same can be done with hustling/projects).

I edit and comp for film and music videos, and the thing that never got solved for me by any NLE is versioning across a revision chain. A shot goes out, a client says warmer, and pull the edit half a second earlier, someone matches that on a call, exports, and three revisions later nobody can say for certain which output the current cut is actually built on, or whether an older render got reused by accident because the filename still said v3_final.

Most teams I have worked with end up with some combination of folder naming conventions and a shared spreadsheet, which works until it does not. Curious what has actually worked for people outside of ad hoc conventions: do you tag renders with the decision that produced them, keep a structured changelog per shot, or is this just an accepted cost of doing revision-heavy creative work? Especially interested if anyone has automated part of this instead of doing it by hand.