← Back to context

Comment by sobiolite

17 hours ago

Good luck, I guess, but in 2026 "CSS Tricks" seems about as relevant as "PostScript Tricks" or "Office Open XML Tricks". Human manipulation of CSS is going to be, at best, a hobby for a few dedicated tinkerers. And I say that as someone who invested a significant amount of the last 20 years getting good at CSS.

I don't really have a definitive answer, so this is more thinking out loud, but why do the Economist, Spectator, WSJ, NYT, or the like continue to do reasonably well?

News is everywhere now, and AI can do a reasonable job guiding me on any economic or political topic I might care about. Yet.. named authors with track records or strong personalities/opinions still seem to draw readers and have value, and maybe CSS Tricks is mildly like that in some niches.

???

CSS tricks was never about only css, it also had js, html, design and other tips, too.

Pretty useful to catch up with webdev related new features

What was your go to source for deep dive articles into new and proposed CSS features? Where did you get your first flex box and grid deep dives?

  • In the old days? Reading the www-style W3C mailing list was the best way to learn about proposed features and people like Dave Hyatt, David Baron, Anne van Kesteren, Eric Mayer, Paul Irish and many more I've forgotten about used to blog about upcoming things. Sites like A List Apart and Smashing Magazine were also good resources for articles about established features and interesting techniques.

I think it's very ominous that their post doesn't even directly mention AI generated CSS.