[HN Gopher] Generative UI and outcome-oriented design
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Generative UI and outcome-oriented design
        
       Author : marban
       Score  : 49 points
       Date   : 2024-04-04 08:00 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nngroup.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nngroup.com)
        
       | gedy wrote:
       | > The Outcome-Oriented Designer - Because AI systems can shortcut
       | the information-seeking process, the human design of
       | microinteractions will become substantially less important.
       | They'll either be inexistent (because the AI system makes them
       | unnecessary), or they'll be dynamically designed through
       | generative UI to fit the user's exact context and needs.
       | 
       | Interesting ideas, though from companies I've worked with, there
       | is a huge cadre of UX people that know nothing else and would
       | likely fight this tooth and nail.
        
         | threatofrain wrote:
         | It also means that designers will own more responsibility and
         | become closer to a researcher who is paired with a AI partner.
         | It's an upgrade in prestige.
        
         | greatpostman wrote:
         | It basically means throwing out everything we know about ux
         | design
        
       | danielvaughn wrote:
       | The more I learn about AI, the less confident I feel that we'll
       | solve the bias and hallucination problems. A lot of these "in the
       | future we will..." predictions assume a linear path towards
       | progress, while the actual path is looking more and more
       | asymptotic.
        
         | MilStdJunkie wrote:
         | Yeah, I've been monkeying around with an AI tool to help me
         | query piles and piles of PDF files - bazillions of
         | specification documents and suchlike - and if there's a single
         | thing I've taken away from it, it's that I can't expect the
         | same answer twice, even for questions that have just the one
         | correct answer.
         | 
         | That's all after preprocessing those PDFs, because there were
         | some characters and sequences that blew up the works. That took
         | some hunting. I _did_ learn that FOSI processors love injecting
         | x00 null characters into the PDF for some godforsaken reason.
         | Didn 't know that. Don't know _why_ , though, and probably
         | never will.
         | 
         | Falling back on older school techniques - from stats, text
         | mining, topic models and other arcana - for some tasks is
         | probably going to be worth it, for a while anyway.
         | 
         | Most users can't use any of this stuff, it's too CLI-ish for
         | the vast majority of the people doing actual work. I suspect
         | this is the gap the OP is hoping to insert themselves into,
         | that gap between these . . these so-called "AI" things . . and
         | the average user, but they're going to need to do a better job
         | of scoping out just how big a job that is.
         | 
         | Now take all this with the following boulder o salt: we can't
         | use any of the big cloud things, everything we do here has to
         | be brewed up on prem, by people like me who do _not_ know what
         | we 're doing. So we're not exactly AI superstars. Odds are
         | everything I say is irrelevant for the outside world, with all
         | your Geminis and whatnot.
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | What's the tool? With temperature set to 0, the output should
           | be reproducible, given the same input conditions.
        
       | hansonkd wrote:
       | A good GenerativeUI product depends on a datasource for the AI to
       | have some working history to make decisions about what kind of
       | interface to show a user.
       | 
       | An A/B test needs thousands of samples in some cases to make a
       | determination about which is preferred. A generative UI would be
       | like running 100 simultaneous a/b tests for your users.
       | 
       | I would think you would need a significant amount of traffic on
       | the order of millions of users to be able to determine to some
       | degree that one UI configuration is better for a particular type
       | of user.
       | 
       | Without the data to know what works the AI will essentially just
       | be randomly generating UIs for each user.
       | 
       | Defining an outcome is actually one of the hardest problems in AI
       | and even in organizations. While you think startups can easily
       | just say "make the UI that gets the most revenue" that isn't
       | necessarily true. For example if a terrible user experience
       | results in more short term revenue but your users die out, that
       | isn't a good outcome for the company. Or maybe you have a free
       | tier that you want people to use for network effect, etc.
       | 
       | So it is very hard to have a single number to use for outcome. If
       | every user has a different UI, then it also becomes hard to spot
       | things that go against the company's interests, etc.
        
       | batshit_beaver wrote:
       | For an article about generative AI/UI, there sure is a lot of
       | talk about recommendations and predictions.
       | 
       | As another side note, the idea of a UI that changes every time
       | you open the site/app is, frankly, ridiculous. Not sure what kind
       | of UX researcher or even user would want that. Seems like a saner
       | approach would be one of two worlds below:
       | 
       | 1) Each app has a carefully designed foundation on top of which
       | user-customizable components exist. This is already common, sans
       | GenAI-powered component creation.
       | 
       | 2) There is no longer a concept of an "app." Users instead
       | interact primarily with a smorgasbord of APIs, via their highly
       | personalized but temporally consistent, AI-assisted personal OS.
        
         | Jonovono wrote:
         | "As another side note, the idea of a UI that changes every time
         | you open the site/app is, frankly, ridiculous."
         | 
         | That's what we have _now_ , already. GenUI would be the
         | opposite, where if you wanted, the UI could never change and it
         | would stay the same if thats what you want.
         | 
         | Totally agree the concept of apps will break down.
        
           | jacobsimon wrote:
           | That's a great point. Imagine you had an AI-based browser
           | that could adapt any website into a consistent UI or reading
           | experience.
        
             | jayd16 wrote:
             | Technically possible now, I suppose. If you're Google and
             | have the analytics, you could make a standard site layout
             | and munge every site into that format based on usage data.
             | Neat idea.
        
             | hansonkd wrote:
             | Websites have spent the last 20 years removing user
             | customizable functionality (think RSS feeds and making API
             | private). While the tech may be possible, I don't see this
             | being a reality without a major reversal in app development
             | philosophies.
             | 
             | Companies want to control what you see so they can control
             | their revenue. Why would they want to expose their data and
             | utility to UIs where they have limited ability to monetize?
        
             | g8oz wrote:
             | Firefox Reader mode does a decent job of this.
        
         | rzzzt wrote:
         | We already had a considerable subset of the required APIs
         | exposed in Web 2.0 times. I don't see it coming back any time
         | soon, despite the integration work it enabled being lots of fun
         | and also genuinely useful.
        
       | willsmith72 wrote:
       | Nice idea, and I love outcome-oriented design. There's so much
       | time wasted, especially in startups, on minute UI details which
       | almost certainly have 0 measurable impact. But I don't really
       | agree you need generative ui
       | 
       | > This individual example may be plausible without genUI, but not
       | at scale.
       | 
       | Nothing about that example seems implausible at scale. It's just
       | a combination of personnalisations, saved settings, and learnt
       | user preferences.
       | 
       | Maybe no one puts that particular example together to that level
       | today, but there's nothing stopping someone doing it today
       | without generative ui.
        
       | andybak wrote:
       | > However, in the short-term, we anticipate quite a few problems
       | and challenges.
       | 
       | For some values of "short-term" and "quite a few"
        
       | jayd16 wrote:
       | Good luck helping your grandma over the phone now. Stack overflow
       | or even a video tutorial? Useless.
       | 
       | Seems like predictable should beat customized for something like
       | a gui.
        
       | mihaic wrote:
       | The big issue I see with this type of personalization of UI is
       | how much worse I would become at helping others to get things
       | done, since my muscle memory for an interface would have been
       | made for my UI.
       | 
       | This lack of shared similarity in the workspace is also another
       | big issue with Apple Vision for instance, but nobody really uses
       | it more than a few hours to get to this realization.
        
         | mateo1 wrote:
         | This is not about improving your experience. This is about
         | getting end users to behave a certain way. If you have a
         | gambling or trading app, you could automatically adjust the UI
         | based on your end users psychological/behavioral profile,
         | gradually over time, to put the more profitable/higher risk
         | option in more prominent/more likely to be used positions. Or
         | maybe your user clicks "block access" by muscle memory and your
         | AI based predictor finds out that if they replace the block
         | button with the allow button users now click allow way more.
         | Big success. I can't wait to see how much more value we can
         | extract from people by controlling their behavior through UIs.
        
       | troupo wrote:
       | This article is a nothingburger attempt to capitalize on the AI
       | hype.
       | 
       | None of it makes any sense if you stop to think about it for even
       | a second. Anything from ever-changing UIs to the actual state of
       | AIs to the basic systemic issue that you can't properly describe
       | all the outcomes a person needs from a product without it being
       | self-contradictory (and ever changing to boot).
       | 
       | Edit: this will not stop multiple startups from chasing VC money
       | using this idea
        
       | GrinningFool wrote:
       | The most important rule I've learned for interfaces (UI - but
       | also API and others) is that they should be self-consistent with
       | no surprises. The user learns what to expect and they can rely on
       | it, which generally makes it easier for them to navigate and get
       | the results they want.
       | 
       | It seems to me that a generated UI does the opposite of that, and
       | leads to a lot of uncertainty...
       | 
       | ... How does support help them, or even troubleshoot problems
       | when the user describes what they saw and did?
       | 
       | ... How can one person instruct another in accomplishing a task
       | when the interface is different?
       | 
       | ... How can you document the instructions for accomplishing
       | specific goals?
       | 
       | ... How user-unfriendly is a UI that not only changes per user,
       | but could change over time as more data is gathered about how the
       | user is interacting? Especially if the user needs to do something
       | out of the ordinary [for them], the means of doing it can get
       | buried over time.
        
         | visarga wrote:
         | > they should be self-consistent with no surprises
         | 
         | And LLMs are exactly what is needed - they know the consistent
         | and no-surprise answer to anything. The UI will adapt to serve
         | your needs, that's how it can help you. The web we see today is
         | full of dark UI patterns and junk content. A generative UI
         | could filter, rank and present the pile of garbage in a clean
         | form.
         | 
         | Social networks and big website operators control what we see,
         | in what order we see it, and how it is presented. All of them
         | carry vectors of attack. They abuse the public. For example FB
         | was always changing where it put various user settings, and
         | resetting them from time to time.
         | 
         | An AI agent that creates a generative UI can guard your
         | preferences. I see these gen-UI agents as running locally in
         | privacy. They interface with the web to interact and gather
         | information, and distill it into bespoke UIs. They overrule all
         | the power games publishers played with users and try to prevent
         | users inadvertently leaking private information, an AI
         | firewall, especially needed now that the web will be filled
         | with synthetic text and other AI agents. Few people will still
         | look at the raw web, we will wear a protective mask of gen-UI.
        
           | FridgeSeal wrote:
           | LLM's struggle to return the same answer twice, and now
           | you're suggesting they'll magically and consistently mediate
           | UX and API differences? I have a hard time believing that.
        
       | _Adam wrote:
       | >Outcome-oriented design involves orchestrating experience design
       | with a greater focus on user goals and final outcomes, while
       | strategically automating aspects of interaction and interface
       | design.
       | 
       | Dark patterns is another type of "outcome oriented design" where
       | the outcome is the user subscribing/not canceling/paying
       | needlessly. Adding "strategic automation" will doubtlessly just
       | make this problem worse.
        
       | g8oz wrote:
       | This article is exactly the type of empty handwavy thought
       | leadership being pushed by every outfit seeking to capitalize on
       | AI. I'm sure many lucrative consulting engagements will follow.
        
         | jdpigeon wrote:
         | Yeah. Unclear after reading this whether anything meeting their
         | definition of GenUI actually exists or whether this is just
         | speculation
        
         | victor106 wrote:
         | Completely agree.
         | 
         | But unfortunately this is a sure shot way to rake in the big
         | bucks. Lot of companies budgets are unfortunately still
         | controlled by people who fall for buzzwords and who don't have
         | the time or inclination to look a bit deeper and understand
         | core concepts and tradeoffs. So they refuse to look at things a
         | little critically.
        
       | aatd86 wrote:
       | Can't even borrow someone laptop anymore... The UI is
       | different...
       | 
       | I doubt that UIs are going to be tailored to every and each
       | person.
        
         | dexwiz wrote:
         | Can't help but feel that is a bit like saying can't go to
         | another website, the UI is different.
        
       | FridgeSeal wrote:
       | So the AI will console some information, and make _some_ kind of
       | UI, the _some_ decisions about layout, and functionality and
       | magically adapt?
       | 
       | Yeah this is going to be so great for usability. "Where did the
       | "foo" button go?" Oh right, the AI has magically decided I am
       | better off with it somewhere else. "Why did the interface change
       | completely today?" Oh right, the AI is having a moment. This
       | feels like a usability nightmare.
       | 
       | This screams upper-management consultancy, doesnt value the work
       | that goes into design and UX and would love to cream some money
       | by pretending they could fire an entire department.
        
       | fragmede wrote:
       | Microsoft Office already did the ribbon thing. Time to try it
       | again?
        
       | upsidepotential wrote:
       | Increasingly likely that UI evolution will prioritize a shift
       | from a "click"-centric approach to one that's "command" oriented.
       | This means AI agents interpreting your instructions and executing
       | task processes, rather than continually reconfiguring the UX to
       | match your preferences. High computing costs with AI also favor
       | instruction-to-task completion dynamic, not just indulging in
       | elaborate screen layout adjustments.
        
       | AlienRobot wrote:
       | Take a look at one of the linked services https://canonic.dev/
       | 
       | This is what the future looks like, but without dragging and
       | dropping.
       | 
       | It's just a bunch of blocks stacked in grids, columns, and rows.
       | This is what GUI and UX has become. Just black text on white
       | rectangles, because it needs to adapt to every form factor, be
       | accessible, be internationizable, be
       | blahblahblabhlabblahblahblah. It has to be generic.
       | 
       | GenUI is the next step in a very depressing trend of sucking out
       | all the color from websites and applications, and just the
       | thought of it happening makes me very sad.
       | 
       | I'd have a much better "user experience" if I found a website
       | that turned my cursor into a sword.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-04-06 23:00 UTC)