My suggestion is to refine UX optimization using “human sense” rather than relying on AI recommendations. The UI and UX proposed by AI are merely standard answers. It is impossible to sense “human sense” in AI proposals. Especially on the front end, “human sense” and “intuition” are differentiating factors. This is because the UX that clients seek is not standard, but unique.
I would argue you want to get base levels of front end development knowledge to begin with without AI. Frontendmasters is good for modern tech stacks, but much easier to master JS CSS and HTML in vanilla formats using w3schools and khanaccademy etc.
In my opinion you can't solely rely on ai you need to get up to speed on terms definitions and patterns
It's not quite "vibe" coding as you lose a little speed, but it's what I find most useful.
Don't go too deep into courses. The facts on the ground changes every month. Don't try to keep up with the hype.
Go out and build things with it. You'll hit a bottleneck. You'll understand how the new tools fix that bottleneck. GPT-5 is absolutely amazing for a number of reasons, but not to the people who rely on the strawberrry benchmark. The AI influencers are also making their money from being contrarian. If you're building things, you'll see through the smoke and mirrors.
I've tried most of the major UI/UX tools now, even dug deep into reddit. Most are slop. You'll get generic UIs, rounded buttons, material designed. Half will have a navigation drawer and bottom bar on the same screen. I doubt the design problem will be solved anytime soon.
The main issue is AI does what is most popular. So it'll fall to the average. Architectures are often dated. The purpose of UI is to stand out. But these UI tools are being designed by mediocre designers and create UI that looks like everyone else's. There's not even some randomization most of the time, so you end up with purple drop shadows everywhere.
For this, learn the foundations. How to design to sell. What is typography (not kerning etc, but words as pictures and emotion). AI knows all these concepts, but won't do it unless you tell it to.
I know a juggler who was frustrated as he didn't have "natural" skills at juggling despite being born into a circus family.
He was good at drawing, so one day he took drawing classes. He realized that the class just repeated everything he learned on his own.
It clicked that he was a "natural" at art and not at juggling. What natural skill meant was simply coming to the right techniques early on compared to other people who might need years to discover the same thing.
He eventually became a really good juggler, by interviewing other "naturals" and reverse engineering how they got there (they just practiced better). Most naturals don't even realize what they're doing right or what others are doing wrong. When naturals do classes, they're sometimes not even that helpful.
My suggestion is to refine UX optimization using “human sense” rather than relying on AI recommendations. The UI and UX proposed by AI are merely standard answers. It is impossible to sense “human sense” in AI proposals. Especially on the front end, “human sense” and “intuition” are differentiating factors. This is because the UX that clients seek is not standard, but unique.
Some theory definitely comes in handy, but then you can focus on something like "AI + UI", ie. start building AI-powered interfaces:
- Chatbots, copilots, search assistants. - Image/audio/video tools that make sense to non-technical users. - Data visualization for AI outputs. - etc.
These can keep you in your comfort zone while you integrate AI.
I would argue you want to get base levels of front end development knowledge to begin with without AI. Frontendmasters is good for modern tech stacks, but much easier to master JS CSS and HTML in vanilla formats using w3schools and khanaccademy etc.
In my opinion you can't solely rely on ai you need to get up to speed on terms definitions and patterns
This is the best guide I've seen on AI augmented coding: https://www.sabrina.dev/p/ultimate-ai-coding-guide-claude-co...
It's not quite "vibe" coding as you lose a little speed, but it's what I find most useful.
Don't go too deep into courses. The facts on the ground changes every month. Don't try to keep up with the hype.
Go out and build things with it. You'll hit a bottleneck. You'll understand how the new tools fix that bottleneck. GPT-5 is absolutely amazing for a number of reasons, but not to the people who rely on the strawberrry benchmark. The AI influencers are also making their money from being contrarian. If you're building things, you'll see through the smoke and mirrors.
I've tried most of the major UI/UX tools now, even dug deep into reddit. Most are slop. You'll get generic UIs, rounded buttons, material designed. Half will have a navigation drawer and bottom bar on the same screen. I doubt the design problem will be solved anytime soon.
The main issue is AI does what is most popular. So it'll fall to the average. Architectures are often dated. The purpose of UI is to stand out. But these UI tools are being designed by mediocre designers and create UI that looks like everyone else's. There's not even some randomization most of the time, so you end up with purple drop shadows everywhere.
For this, learn the foundations. How to design to sell. What is typography (not kerning etc, but words as pictures and emotion). AI knows all these concepts, but won't do it unless you tell it to.
It's the same as with any other new tech, start using it.
Use Claude Code, Figma MCP, Supabase MCP, Lovable, v0.dev.
Find where your interests overlap interesting tech, and who knows, you might be able to build a business from it
Learn the back end.
You don't need a course ... just build something with Claude Code and Shadcn UI
Everytime "just" is mentioned, i question the life again.
I know a juggler who was frustrated as he didn't have "natural" skills at juggling despite being born into a circus family.
He was good at drawing, so one day he took drawing classes. He realized that the class just repeated everything he learned on his own.
It clicked that he was a "natural" at art and not at juggling. What natural skill meant was simply coming to the right techniques early on compared to other people who might need years to discover the same thing.
He eventually became a really good juggler, by interviewing other "naturals" and reverse engineering how they got there (they just practiced better). Most naturals don't even realize what they're doing right or what others are doing wrong. When naturals do classes, they're sometimes not even that helpful.