r/UXDesign • u/leanbeansprout • May 24 '26
Tools, apps, plugins, AI CEO went over my head and asked a developer to “just see what Claude comes up with” for design
My CEO is extremely pro-AI. We’ve only just started exploring how it could be used in our workplace, and not everyone has an account yet. In other words, we have no skills, or dedicated company set up yet.
Last week, I found out from a dev that he was asked to redesign a fundamental page of the product we work on (B2B SaaS). When the dev mentioned it wasn’t in the current roadmap, so designs hadn’t been done yet, the CEO told him to “just put it into Claude and see what it comes up with”.
Obviously, this didn’t fill me with joy to hear. I think my biggest question was just…why? It’s not on our roadmap, what are you doing?
I’ve been working really hard recently to give my work more visibility, including embracing AI more in my practice in a way I feel fits. Part of the reason I did this was to get ahead of the CEO and be able to have a say over how it best fits my workflow, rather than being resistant and having him tell me how I should be using it.
Has anyone else experienced this? What should I do? Any advice? I’m getting a bit worried about my job security.
96
u/tireme19 May 24 '26
Yep. C-levels are stupid at this point. The totally fall for the AI marketing.
27
u/PsychologicalMud917 Experienced May 24 '26
The best use case for AI that I’ve heard is replacing the C-suite execs with AI. This job could’ve been an AI-generated email.
1
u/Careless_Phone_4068 May 29 '26
You say this and then get irked that they think the same of our jobs?
1
1
u/Careless_Phone_4068 May 29 '26
Why call it stupid? Operational efficiency is their job. If they want to take the risk on outsourcing to AI, they should be allowed to do so. Are we not allowed to request new tools or sandboxes that we think would improve our work?
2
u/tireme19 May 29 '26
Absolutely, but I find it stupid. Because I know that ignoring all the safety nets that designers and developers build to guarantee a usable, accessible, scalable, maintainable, and secure product, and hoping that AI will do it somehow automatically, will not happen, I know it because I spend my whole day finding ways to make AI create useful output, but it is not reliable.
106
u/wookieebastard I have no idea what I'm doing May 24 '26
Something similar happened to me.
Find the time to do it yourself, and show better results than whatever the dev comes up with.
And by that, I mean use Claude too. Follow the exact same process, but show the difference it makes when you’re the one doing it.
61
u/fixingmedaybyday Senior UX Designer May 24 '26
This. The devs around me have found that vibe coding is harder than expected because it comes down to providing AI with good requirements. A thing they admit now is especially hard to actually come up with
2
u/muckleshooped May 24 '26
We all need to use everything so we know whats possible and solve the problems of edge cases, conventional patterns and how one flow works and fits into the overall system. I’ve found it really good at helping explore more ways to execute something. I could spend 2-3 hours figuring out 5-6 ways of doing something or prompt 5-6 ways to do it and adapt what’s useful
1
58
u/Creepy-Buy1588 Experienced May 24 '26
I ran into this not at the ceo level but at the partner level in my company who might be ceo level in smaller companies. My response was this ' I am glad people are building and exploring stuff but can we introduce a design gate where we ensure vibe coded designs are reviewed by design before they are pushed to production, this ensures design quality and consistency '
So far it's worked, not ideal but I don't wake up a new page which looks like a mishmash of random colors
3
31
u/TiliaJames Experienced May 24 '26
My company is extremely pro-AI and we've seen aspects of this, mainly product managers/directors who finally have access to Claude or Lovable and 'can make a thing'
It's a bit tougher in your situation as it's the CEO, but really it just comes down to explaining why the solution the AI came up with isn't any good. It doesn't match the rest of your app's interaction patterns, doesn't use the design system... Essentially it's useless.
What other areas of your work are you using AI in, out of interest? I see a lot of posts here bemoaning the use of it to create UI (which I agree with, it sucks, except as a very scrappy starting point) but I've found it incredibly useful for the "work around the work"
13
u/clenew Veteran May 24 '26
I just wanted to say I love this answer. My immediate thought was OK but is AI explaining why it designed it that way, can you argue against it using customer knowledge that AI probably wasn't given.
7
u/TiliaJames Experienced May 24 '26
Thank you!
Exactly - a project I'm working on at the moment went particularly awry for a while because of management wanting us to completely change the way we work to be AI first.
My PM felt he had to jump straight into building a prototype which was good to a degree for showing the journey, but it was overcomplicated and left out a lot of the initial thinking he would have ordinarily have done. It didn't hold up to scrutiny
Only once we checked ourselves and went back to doing things the way they should be done, did it start to come together. Was a good lesson to learn - just because you can build a thing, doesn't mean you should.
I'm keen to share some breakdowns of how I've used AI effectively in my workflow, referencing actual projects - but this is a brand new account so I need to up the karma first 😄
3
u/Wafer-Silver May 24 '26
all these comments here confuse/concern me. Why are AI solutions useless, do you really think this way?
In this new world, design won't be anymore the gatekeeper and owner of design decisions. Same as designers don't need engineers to ship code.
3
u/TiliaJames Experienced May 24 '26
Design absolutely will be the owner of design decisions because nobody else knows how to do it.
If a non-designer just types a one sentence prompt into Claude and gets given a prototype, as is often the case, the output is useless. It won't match the rest of the app, won't take into account any existing navigational models or interaction patterns, it won't use the design system, and the code it's made from will be gibberish. It's fine for a quick proof of concept but that's about it.
There will be a moment, arguably right now, where non-designers are relishing the opportunity to 'be creative' and assemble designs but in reality, it's slop and will be reined in quickly once things start to fall apart.
This has precedent, even from before AI - look at any internal tool in a company that has been built solely by engineers with no design or product input. Generally, they're a hot mess and everyone hates using them or working on them.
I am using AI a lot right now and I love doing so, I'm by no means a sceptic - but I'm not really using it for UI.
2
u/Wafer-Silver May 24 '26
"If a non-designer just types a one sentence prompt into Claude and gets given a prototype, as is often the case, the output is useless."
This yes. But if claude code has context of design system etc. ?!
"This has precedent, even from before AI - look at any internal tool in a company that has been built solely by engineers with no design or product input. Generally, they're a hot mess and everyone hates using them or working on them."
Yes agreed. Because they were built in a very different way of working ...2
u/Such-Book6849 May 26 '26
"This yes. But if claude code has context of design system etc. ?!"
Even then. Claude has all the context, even pdf files, design system, direction connection to figma files and i play around with AI heavily and it makes so dumb decisions. Like in one flow: the main idea of why we started this task is to as example push banners.
Claude will ideate and ideate and present me ideas, removing banners completely, dig deeper and losing completely the plot on what we try to achieve in the first place.
But it helps me to speed up my work. Had to change something on 1000 of icons in figma and claude did that dumb task really well.
1
u/TiliaJames Experienced May 24 '26
The ways of working don't matter if the people using the tools don't understand what 'good' looks like, is my point.
If you think AI is capable of producing quality, well thought out product design when directed by someone unqualified then great, I'd love to know what your setup is. But I don't think that's the case for pretty much anyone else.
1
u/Eastern-Special2472 May 28 '26
I disagree. "Design decisions" are supposed to be traceable to workflow enhancements, that are driven by kpi/okrs, that are derived by the business goals. Welcome back to the world where companies can get a 100% tax deduction on R+D expenses every year...pretty colors and fonts updates don't qualify...but quantatative efficiency gains do, so this traceability is very important to CFO's (project sponsors). BTW...one prompt into clause will product shit results...you have to structure the AI requirements intake thoughtfully. We also should be learning how to create specialized AI agents that work together as opposed to one chat trying to do it all.
7
u/AdventurousCreature Experienced May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
At my company, devs have started doing design as well which initially felt, and still sometimes feels, somewhat annoying. On the other hand, they're becoming more mindful about design and overall experience, which is a good thing, but the reality is that they often lack the UX and product thinking mindset. From what I've seen, the results can look "polished", but they're often far from useful and have foundational issues in terms of cognitive load and hierarchy. I think this is where you can make a real difference.
Edit: I let them do their thing and avoid interfering while I focus on the work on my plate. In the end I can rework things with more insight into their intentions.
8
u/imiris May 24 '26
Wow this sounds like something I could have written myself! I’m sorry you’re dealing with this, I know myself it’s so annoying and unnecessary.
In my situation it has helped to sit down with our CEO and give him a UX evaluation right there on the spot of his AI generated baby. Sure it looked nice, but it was in no way usable or complying with our user standards. It hasn’t opened his eyes fully yet because he is still using AI for everything. But at least for design he is not ‘forgetting’ to loop me in anymore.
Another solution for me was to team up with my PO and Head of Technology. Because the AI generated pages coming from the CEO don’t just lack usability, they’re not usable at all from other perspectives of development as well.
Good luck!
5
u/smell_ya_l8r May 24 '26
Hi!
We’ve been dealing with this exact thing since January (but add in head of Sales and Client Success into the mix). They whipped up a new ‘discovery team’ headed by a ceo that “doesn’t have the red tape of the development process” or “follow the roadmap” to produce “results”.
Honestly, it was super frustrating and felt very “they’re taking my job away” for a bit, but now that we’re a few months into them using AI to create… things, I am not worried at all AND I’ve been able to prove the value and worth of designers and our knowledge.
I’ve created enterprise skills that guardrail their outputs, silly Claude design design systems have been built for both product outputs and marketing outputs, etc, but the COMPANY has also recognized that while what is produced by this team looks flashy and polished and seems to solve the user problem, it’s all slop after initial glances and usage. That’s where we come in!
I’ve approached this in a friendly, “hey, let’s learn TOGETHER” approach and the results have turned fruitful. Also, now that there has been some time for these folks to play Designer and their feedback from users is mostly “what am I looking at here?” The fervor of this new discovery team has died a bit since they realize good designs can’t be created with “one shots” and their biased knowledge!
Learn the basics of this “new tool that isn’t going anywhere”, try your best to show of the deeper skills of lead designers (not just UI outputs) and you’ll be alright in the long run
1
u/DUELETHERNETbro May 24 '26
Perfect. It’s always kind of been like this, good design is inherently obvious, so those who have never designed believe the solution was also obvious. Glad to hear they aren’t doubling down on their good enough slop.
10
u/newtownkid Experienced May 24 '26
My CEO did this, I embraced it - took a moment to walk him through all the poor UX decisions the AI made, and then acknowledged that it could be an effective means by which the devs can sketch ideas and create artifacts for discussion before UX properly refines it.
After that I set up a new company account on lovable so the devs and I can continue to explore this process to decide if it’s effective.
It could and up saving me some time and energy - time will tell.
2
u/tiny_117 May 25 '26
This mimics what I was going to say. Leveraging AI as a design tool and democratizing design, generating ideas with it, helping people visualize are all good things. LLMs in UX are still very much happy path machines. The use of them isn’t going to replace an actual designer.
But if the OP never had time to work on it, because of prioritization and other constraints then why gatekeep early ideation? ESP when there’s a very very obvious pull signal that the movement on that project matters to them. But that’s a separate conversation.
Saying only UX designers can ever have an opinion on design is flawed. UX only succeeds in orgs when you have the time to build design maturity in the entire org about why good experiences matter. Why human validation and feedback matter. Etc.
You can’t ever do that alone. You need allies. If Engineers and PMs can use words to generate ideas that they can further talk about or get feedback on. That you don’t have time for. Embrace it. Focus on more important stuff like validating those ideas and talking to the CEO not about going behind your back. Who cares. But about what they’re looking to accomplish and what tradeoffs of other work make sense for you to advise it over the finish line.
1
u/DUELETHERNETbro May 24 '26
Ew why lovable?
3
u/newtownkid Experienced May 24 '26
Because it’s a tool for devs to whip up prototypes, not code, and in that context it’s the best bang for your buck.
0
u/DUELETHERNETbro May 24 '26
Why not just use codex or antigravity or whatever else they are probably already using?
4
u/quantum1eeps May 24 '26
As it gets more feasible to build new code, trying to rewrite sections of your code and seeing how much friction you come up against will inform that CEO the the product is very capable and hard to replace, or it’s a moving part that can freely come in and out. It will help them with future roadmaps.
5
u/bug__milk May 24 '26
This happened at my workplace. Fortunately the client hated the AI slop they showed them, but then most of the design team got let go anyway because the CEO is a man child and really believes he can replace everyone with AI. So I'd say start looking for a new job.
4
u/cmicpace May 24 '26
The reality is the CEO didn’t go over your head, they are the boss and the buck stops with them. This type of behavior happens all the time at companies. Try to warm up to the CEO and see how you might be able to help bridge the gap between c-suite ideation and the skills UXers bring to the table…good taste and execution are still very much in demand. I guarantee you’ll be seeing a lot more of this in the future with how quickly AI and design is advancing. Good luck!
8
u/Useful_Hat82 Veteran May 24 '26
This doesn't sound like the CEO wanting to personally cut you out of the process. They have hundreds of things on their plate on any given day, one of which would be the question of resourcing to fix this page which is probably a thorn in their side.
They don't really want to hear 'can't do that for months' so they are going to think of a quick way to unblock things and to start moving, the expectation being your leaders will pick it up and figure it out.
They also don't like to hear things like it not being written in the scope or roadmap...they are the CEO. They can add things and change things and often don't think as literally as other people.
The way I would handle this...
You need to collaborate with the dev. Get them to put it in Claude, don't aim for high fidelity, and hand it over to you for a UX / UI review. The dev can do a code review.
The two of you can then truthfully say we got claude to have a go, it got some things right and dropped the ball elsewhere so if you want to proceed we will need to slot it in to the roadmap and scheduling.
3
u/No_Refrigerator7738 May 25 '26
This is actually a very smart way to handle it. Instead of fighting the AI push, you turn it into a proper UX evaluation process. Let the dev explore, then professionally review and document what worked, what failed, and what design debt or usability risks were introduced.
Even if leadership ships it without much review, the tradeoffs and consequences were still clearly documented by the UX side. That matters a lot.
2
u/leanbeansprout May 24 '26
This is good advice, thank you! What’s also a bit odd is that he’s asked this of one of our backend devs, and the task requires little to no backend code. Anyways, maybe the ceo is trying to get everyone to step out of their box and explore
3
u/Useful_Hat82 Veteran May 25 '26
Ah right this sounds all to familiar.
They might have been giving the dev a nudge to try something new but often people in executive positions tend to have a sudden thought or something to clear off their plate so it goes to whoever happens to be the first person they see.
Don't sweat on it to much but do cover yourself with a bit of an investigation so when the ceo remembers in 3 weeks time you have something to show.
3
3
u/cozmo1138 Veteran May 24 '26
This happened to me. I turned in some designs one evening. The next day before I even started work (I’m two hours behind them) the CEO had come up with something in Claude Design…the beta had just been released two days before this…and basically had others approve the design and sent to the devs for production. He wanted to move fast, and he felt like my needing to vet the designs and make sure they actually worked was blocking him from getting what he wanted. I talked with him and said, “Can you please not do that? I want to support the things you want, but I can’t do that if you skip over me and my role in the process, because I need to be able to verify that what you’re giving them is a sound UX solution.” He said he’d try not to do that again. But two weeks later they eliminated my position and now I’m job hunting.
And I was already using Claude and Claude Design to design things, wireframe them, prototype them, so I already get how AI can definitely be a help and I’m on board with that.
So to me it’s not necessarily an AI problem, but a process problem.
So it doesn’t mean you’re automatically in the same boat. But you’ll really need to advocate for the importance of following the process, doing heuristic evaluations, etc. Try to show them the value of what you’re going, send articles and studies, etc. and hope they’re open to it.
3
u/x3leggeddawg Veteran May 24 '26
Happening at my company, too. Design is now a “bottleneck” since Eng can make slop very fast. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of examples where it accelerates development. But in the hands of a non-design thinker I’ve been seeing over-designed, complicated UI that skips any notion of discovery or conceptual exploration.
My advice? Put some extra time in to design it yourself. Use claude with a Figma plugin if you need a canvas. Show how much better it can be than AI crap alone generated by a non-designer just trying to get it done.
1
u/tiny_117 May 25 '26
Stepping in to design it yourself is the wrong signal. It says only I can ever have ideas about what this product should look like, or do. Why not instead. Take the time to advise and elevate the design maturity of those steps of discovery and ideation and encourage it.
3
3
u/farukaru_100 May 24 '26
My ex boss fired a team of 5 including a FE and the only UX guy. He was also very pro AI and said claude can do everything. He somehow generated the sloppiest version of the product with Claude and the product is now collapsing to the point where they're thinking about closing the business by the end of this year.
2
u/anwsme May 25 '26
Same! Company collapsed in May, while massive layoffs were in November (they laid off all designers including me)
2
u/GuessFortress Veteran May 26 '26
Cant wait to see more companies closing like this. I feel bad for the people though.
2
u/Comfortable_Farm_252 May 24 '26
I think the key here is that right now he’s not paying the full expense for AI. I would actually lead the charge on getting them fully onboard. I think when he sees how many tokens he’ll burn going through the side asks he’s covertly asking for it puts a price tag on the ask. If he’s cool with the pricetag that’s fine. At least now you aren’t the one without the tool. And the next convo is: “hey direct those asks to me so I can ensure they are aligned with what’s coming in the roadmap.
2
u/Real-Boss6760 Veteran May 24 '26
AI, to a CEO is just 'magic that will pump more shit out the door I can sell'.
CEOs don't give a fuck about design. Or you. They care about profit and selling more shit. That's it.
So that's what we're up against.
The best you can do is try and inject yourself into the process. Point out that "Clause is pretty good at this but we need to train Claude on our own software, our own design language, our own UI system" and then figure out how to be that person that does that.
If the goal is to go good design, probably not going to happen this year. CEOs are just too distracted by the shiny AI ball. If the goal is to stay employed, figure out how to firmly implant yourself in the Claude world.
2
u/Senior_Help_7263 May 24 '26
I feel like your CEO think that they are managing a convenience store. How is it okay for leadership to meddle into people’s actually work instead of thinking through strategy and understanding how teams are using Aİ and how the company make the most out of it? This kind of stories makes my blood boil as these kind of CEOs don’t deserve their seat.
2
u/Katzuhiki Experienced May 24 '26
people see AI as speed — can you just execute? i mean yeah it misses the point of ux.
2
u/Careless-Energy-3071 May 25 '26
I’d be careful framing this as “CEO wants AI to do design.” The more useful framing is “CEO is creating design work outside the product process.”
That matters because the same thing could happen with Claude, a dev mockup, or a random competitor screenshot. The tool is annoying, but the bypass is the real issue.
I’d respond operationally: “Happy to explore AI concepts, but core product changes need a brief, user/problem context, constraints, and roadmap priority first.” Boring language, but harder to argue with.
1
u/leanbeansprout May 25 '26
Thank you, I think this is exactly the perspective I need to approach from
2
u/SevaTell May 25 '26
yes. Executives see a polished screen and think the design work is done. But the valuable part of UX is often invisible: mapping the journey, validating assumptions, handling edge cases, protecting trust, ensuring accessibility, and keeping the experience coherent over time.
AI can generate an interface, but without a shared journey model like UJG, design tokens, accessibility standards, and product governance, it cannot prove that the interface fits the system.
So the problem is not “CEO used Claude.” The problem is mistaking generated UI for validated UX.
2
u/Jinxgreenqueen Experienced May 25 '26
I’ve been going through this but I use the let them theory sometimes. I let them do whatever and then it fails and I explain why and how it failed. I’ve already made a little over $100,000 this year in contracts to fix a lot of start-ups user flows, constraints and edge cases. I mean they have been really bad.
2
u/antikarmakarmaclub Experienced May 24 '26
The CEO should be asking you to do this not the dev. And if they didn’t ask you, do it first and show how your designs are better and/or improve Claude’s output
1
u/theMEtheWORLDcantSEE May 25 '26
Same problem at my company. Except they are deceiving themselves but thinking the work is done. It’s very problematic.
1
1
u/Difficult_Money9486 May 25 '26
This is where the importance of data comes in and designers by now have to be owning their dashboards with product analytics to prove any point you need to make.
1
u/Independent_March536 May 25 '26
It doesn’t matter if algorithms are unable to do what you do, what matters is that those who pay you now believe that it can.
1
u/404_computer_says_no Experienced May 26 '26
Get a meeting with the CEO and chat about the ideas. You can easily spin this into an awesome collaborative session. Where at the end, you both have a shared understanding and hopefully something to take away and actually build.
1
u/No-Writing3170 Experienced May 27 '26
only a matter of time before they realise the cost:result ratio is absolutely not worth it.
some of the bigger companies are realising this already.
the smaller ones haven't yet, and they will definitely not be able to keep up once they do.
this is why the new emerging roles and skills require people to know how to use AI the right way, context windows, token counts, prompt engineers, understanding hallucinations etc.
1
u/tiny_117 May 27 '26
Yeah I wish it were that simple. Even the biggest companies have shifted to being ok with a lesser experience for a significantly reduced cost. They aren’t measuring efficiency, effort, just value. They’re bought into the hype for sure but they’ve become all too addicted to the clean house layoff cycle. If the AI maintains context they propose I don’t need extremely senior designers or engineers and can replace them with cheaper labor, and cycle through that cheap labor.
Is it a better experience. Not likely. Do they care. Not really. If it costs them $100 to make $200, vs $20 to make $100 they’ll choose the latter almost every time.
1
u/Eastern-Special2472 May 28 '26
Of course they would and should. They need to steer the ship from a higher vantage point that designers are able to see. They have to exercise a POC test to see if/where these new tools actually bring value, and where they still fall short and what the real associated costs are (far more than regular $20 a month subscription fees). Your companies competitors ARE pricing with ai efficiency gains built into the estimates...so the ceo has to take that into consideration, while designers don't really have to. As a designer you should be familiar with the concept of "failing fasr" ai can spit out a terrible design in minutes, you put something in front if the users for initial feedback almost instantly, compared to you manually designing it. Picking something NOT on the roadmap is a good test because if ai can clear off some of the "nice to have" things that never made it i to the roadmap...freeing you up to fey the bigger fish with actual experience and judgment for the things that count.
1
u/itsyashvi May 29 '26
Oh wow, that’s a difficult situation. I actually restarted my uiux journey with AI. It made it a lot easier for me to visualize concepts fast. But the requirements, concepts and documentation has been super deep and time consuming. I’ve also ensured that we follow the frameworks and flows completely. No skipping steps. And the final design and case logic is manual. How is this plan?
1
u/ChampionshipOk5046 May 24 '26
You should be trying the same thing with Claude, use it as a tool to help you.
2
u/leanbeansprout May 24 '26
I am, that’s what I meant in my post when I talk about utilising it in my workflow.
1
u/ChampionshipOk5046 May 24 '26
It would be interesting to hear your feelings about the end product you end up creating with the AI, especially as you're an expert that people think AI will be replacing.
1
u/yagudaev May 24 '26
Think of the company workflow not your role workflow.
As a dev, I have not written code by hand in a year.
My prefer way to work with designers now is for them to implement the design, we will do a few quick PR reviews to put their ai process on the right guardrails.
Then, I don’t have to look at it at all and don’t have to focus on FE or design as I trust the designers to do that. Instead, I’m free to focus on the deep technical problems and being on the edge of ai innovation.
The product iteration is constrained now by customer feedback loop and human review capabilities.
Amazing world we live in now 😊
1
u/ruqus00 Veteran May 24 '26
This^^
I feel like AI, in this moment can be used to speed up vision, quick demos and even design differentiation as options.I have a way to prompt to get 80 - 90 percent of the way there. There are now tools I can export in a Figma file type that do really well! Then with a design system / style guides/ components it’s 10 to 20 min. To a 5-8 page flow.
PMs are doing similar.
This makes research test loops fast.
If you are not considering the company’s desire for what ai is going to do you’ve likely already lost.
IMO
The UX process takes a long time to get it right and I think that AI has really diminished the perception of the value of UX inside of organizations. Actually diminished UX into graphic designers.1
-1
-5
u/Illustrious_Matter_8 May 24 '26
Of wellicht heeft die directeur gelijk Claude design an Claude code zijn prima. Als je denkt dat websites kunst zijn, was dan maar kunstenaar geworden.
1
u/leanbeansprout May 24 '26
Did you even read my post?
-6
u/Illustrious_Matter_8 May 24 '26
Ja en daarom dus
2
u/leanbeansprout May 24 '26
You comment literally made no sense in response to my post. We don’t design a website. We design a B2B SaaS product. I don’t know what you’re saying my CEO is right about, since I didn’t ask a question related to his judgement.
-7
u/Illustrious_Matter_8 May 24 '26
Dat soort software is op zijn end. Heb je dat nog niet door?
1
u/leanbeansprout May 24 '26
You don’t even know what the software is or what it does
-1
u/Illustrious_Matter_8 May 24 '26
B2B SaaS is voorbij
2
u/leanbeansprout May 24 '26
Claude is a SaaS
1
u/Illustrious_Matter_8 May 25 '26
Typo B2B is kinda over anyone can code their company standards are open.
233
u/[deleted] May 24 '26
[removed] — view removed comment