The idea behind Lift started with a workflow that every web developer has done at some point: you find a UI component on a website that does exactly what you need, you open DevTools, and you start copying HTML and hunting through stylesheets trying to figure out which CSS rules are actually responsible for making it look the way it does.
It's tedious. You copy some HTML, paste it into your project, and it looks nothing like the original because you're missing half the styles. So you go back, copy more CSS, paste that, realize some of it conflicts with your existing styles, and spend the next hour debugging cascade issues. Sound familiar? Yeah. We've all been there.
I've been through this more times than I can count. And every single time, the same thought: "There has to be a better way to do this." Eventually I got tired of just thinking it.
Copying Code From Websites Isn't Lazy, It's Smart
There's a misconception that copying code from websites is somehow cheating or lazy. It's not. It's how the web has always worked. View Source has been a feature since the first web browser. CSS was designed to be inspectable. The entire web platform is built on the idea that you can see how things are made.
The problem is that the tools haven't kept up with the complexity. In 2005, you could View Source on a website and understand the entire page. In 2026, the source of a modern web app is a tangled mix of minified JavaScript bundles, CSS-in-JS runtime styles, framework-generated class names, and dynamically rendered markup that doesn't exist in the original HTML at all.
DevTools is powerful, but it was built for debugging, not for extracting. It shows you everything about an element: every inherited style, every overridden rule, every computed value. What it doesn't do is tell you which of those hundreds of properties are actually responsible for making the element look the way it does. That's the gap Lift fills.
From 30 Minutes of DevTools Spelunking to 10 Seconds
I built Lift to turn that 30-minute process into a 10-second one. Click the element, get clean and scoped code, paste it and it works. No DevTools spelunking, no hunting through minified stylesheets, no guessing which CSS rules are actually doing the heavy lifting. Just the code you need, ready to use.
The initial version was intentionally minimal: full page extraction and an element picker with scoped CSS output. No accounts, no cloud features, no AI. Just a tool that does one thing well. There's something satisfying about a tool that respects your time like that.
Who Is Lift For?
Honestly, I built it for myself first. I was tired of the DevTools dance every time I wanted to reference how another site built something. But the use case is broader than just my workflow.
If you're a developer prototyping a UI and you see a component on another site that does exactly what you need, you shouldn't have to reverse-engineer it through minified stylesheets. If you're a student trying to understand how a complex layout works, you should be able to pull it apart and study the pieces. If you're freelancing and a client sends you a site saying "make it look like this," you should be able to extract the reference cleanly instead of squinting at screenshots.
The common thread is anyone who sees something on the web and wants to understand or reuse it without spending 30 minutes in DevTools to do so.
What We've Added Since Launch
Since the initial release, I've added AI chat, code translation, extraction history, and plan-based features. But the core value hasn't changed: see something you like on the web, extract it cleanly, and use it in your own work.
Every feature serves that central workflow. I haven't bolted on project management or design tools or anything that doesn't directly help you get from "I like that" to "I'm using that." Feature creep is how good tools become bloated tools, and I'm determined to stay focused.
Lift's Free Plan and Pricing Philosophy
Lift is free to use for basic extraction. The paid plans unlock AI features and higher usage limits. We think that's a fair trade. The tool is useful without paying, and the paid features genuinely save time for people who use Lift frequently.
I'm not interested in crippling the free tier to push upgrades. If you only need to extract a few elements a month, the free plan should feel complete. You shouldn't hit a paywall in the middle of a workflow and feel frustrated. That's a sign the free tier is too restrictive, not a sign you should upgrade.
The paid plans exist for people whose workflow depends on Lift regularly, people for whom the time savings justify the cost without any convincing. If you're extracting and translating code multiple times a day, the Pro plan should pay for itself quickly. If you're not, the free plan is genuinely free, not a trial with a countdown.
What's on the Roadmap for Lift
I have a long list of things I want to build. Better support for extracting entire page sections, not just individual elements. A shareable extraction format so teams can pass components to each other. Deeper integration with design tools like Figma. Support for more translation targets as new frameworks gain traction.
But I'm going to take my time. Each feature needs to feel as considered as the core extraction experience. I'd rather ship four great features a year than twelve mediocre ones. If you have thoughts on what I should build next, I'm genuinely listening. This is as much your tool as it is mine.