Pinterest sucks.

You can create your private archive with Bookmarker. Share collections publicly if you want.

https://bookmarker.cc/

Good one thanks.

For those who want to take a trip down memory lane about Cameron, here you go: http://www.thehoweofitall.com/

Yess! Fav quote from the series.

Thanks Boris, great insights for builders.

These things also on my mind recently. I'm a freelancer, providing design-development services, and trying to understand as things changing rapidly.

I don't think even the tools are advancing, allowing us to build in a new way, not everyone will be able to develop production ready products. Or good looking ones. So there will be always in need for people know how to orchestrate the new workflows with good taste and years of experience.

Couple of articles I've bookmarked recently:

● What, then, are we paying for? https://quinnkeast.com/writing/software-is-problem-ownership

● Designers as agent orchestrators: what I learnt shipping with AI in 2025 https://uxdesign.cc/designers-as-agent-orchestrators-what-i-...

● The new UX Toolkit: data, context, and evals https://uxdesign.cc/the-new-ux-toolkit-data-context-and-eval...

● How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Terminal https://pablostanley.substack.com/p/how-i-stopped-worrying-a...

● The rise of the Model Designer https://uxdesign.cc/the-rise-of-the-model-designer-cef429d9c...

They only shared the interior, not exterior.

Photo collection: https://bookmarker.cc/bora/ferrari-luce

● AI brands are moving away from stereotypical tech aesthetics towards more human-centered designs.

● Visual identities often incorporate gradients, abstract shapes, and calming color palettes to convey innovation and approachability.

● Many AI companies are focusing on building trust through transparent and user-friendly interfaces.

● The aesthetics of AI are evolving to reflect the technology's increasing integration into everyday life.

Good design is good business.

Interesting. What do you think the reason for not being transparent on this matter?

For the same reason they use "tokens" instead of kilobytes: so that you don't do the conversion yourself and realise that for example spending a million "tokens" on claude-opus-4.6 costs you anywhere from $10 (input tokens) to $37.5 (output tokens). Now, 1 million tokens sounds pretty big and "unreachable" until you realise that's about 4 megabytes of text. It's less than three floppy disks of data going back and forth.

Now let's assume you want to send a CD worth of data to Opus 4.6. 700 megabytes * $10 (price per million input tokens) / 4 (rounding down one megabyte to roughly 250k "tokens") = $1750. For Opus 4.6 to return a CD amount of data back to you: $37.50 * 700 / 4 = ~$6.5k.

A terabyte worth of data with a 50:50 input/output ratio would cost you $5.7 million. A terabyte worth of data with a 50:50 input/output ratio on gpt-5.2-pro would cost you $25.2 million. (Note: OpenAI's API pricing still hasn't been updated to reflect 5.3 prices.)

So we get layers upon layers upon layers upon layers upon layers of obfuscation to hide those numbers from you when you simply subscribe for a fixed monthly fee!

Do people care about how many bytes they are sending or receiving?

Most people care about getting the right bytes.

Oh man. Thanks for explaining. That sounds like a dark pattern.

Blurring the cost-benefit analysis in the interest of downplaying the costs.