Why curated still beats generated
The case against the infinite scroll of AI-generated assets — and why a human editor is the most underrated tool in a marketplace.

There's a kind of marketplace that has become unavoidable: infinite scrolls of AI-generated assets, all technically competent, all faintly interchangeable. We've bought from them. We've also quietly abandoned most of what we bought.
The thing that keeps coming back to us is small: whenever a pack has a human editor whose taste you can feel, you end up using it. Whenever it doesn't, you don't.
Taste is the feature
We started AIFlow because we wanted an asset library that we'd actually use. That meant smaller, not bigger. It meant choosing between two very similar assets, rather than shipping both. It meant writing sentences, not generating them.
The editors we work with are allowed — encouraged — to throw out 80% of what lands on their desk. The remaining 20% is the pack.
A note on AI
We use AI every day. It drafts, proposes, iterates. But no pack goes out without a person reading every asset, checking every file, writing the description by hand. That's the line for us.
More from the journal.

A year of warm websites
After twelve months of cream backgrounds and terracotta accents, here's what we've learned about designing with warm palettes at scale.

Shipping a site in an afternoon
A walk-through of how we use our own packs to take a new project from empty repo to deployed in half a day.

On owning your assets
Subscriptions expire. Licenses don't have to. Our case for lifetime, transferable asset licenses in an era of perpetual rent.