‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

What About Rails?

334 points · 236 comments · jrochkind1

  1. Twey · · focus · HN ↗
    > 37signals differentiates their products with opinionated UI/UX, not novel features. They are rewriting Hey as six native apps because the web fidelity isn’t good enough. So UI matters enough to justify complete rewrites, but also everyone just wants CLIs?

    I've seen this one a few times lately. People should stop building UIs, nobody wants to interact with a UI. Everyone's app should just be an API that you can use with a chatbot. Except for my app — my app is a handcrafted miracle of artisanal UX and its UI will change the way you see the world.

    It's exactly the old argument, just now with LLMs in the place of shell pipelines: in terms of functionality and value to users, software ought to be malleable and composable. We've known it since the eighties. But the model of selling a piece of software as a product as if it were a pair of shoes is incompatible with that. You need a big monolithic application to justify users paying a bunch of money for it, and you need it to have a fancy interface that makes an impression. And the whole software industry is built on top of that model. Where monolithic software is completely unfit for a purpose, like when it needs to be a component of a larger system, we rely on (mostly unpaid) OSS.

    Except now LLMs let you, with very little technical know-how, plaster a ‘programmable’ interface on top of unstructured data/interface meant for humans, and because that's what we actually want, of course everybody does that. So the end result is a wildly expensive pipeline from API to UI and back to API again. I wonder how long the legacy ‘human-oriented’ layer in the middle, and the industry that's been built on top of it, will last.

    (Separately, chatbots are not great as a UI for most things, and the problem of building the universal UI still also stands. But it turns out for a lot of things people would rather have a bad universal UI than a good special-purpose UI for each task.)

    1. jmathai · · focus · HN ↗
      I think chat is a great entry point for many experiences. The approachability and flexibility are unmatched.

      A question becomes, how do you evolve a chat experience to task specific actions?

      I’m building an app to explore scripture. Chat is an amazing starting point. But it’s terrible once you get into reading the actual scripture.

      I think we will see more of this in the future. Here is how I’ve envisioned evolving an experience out of chat. Curious if others have their own ideas.

      <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;trysojourn.app" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;trysojourn.app

      1. skinfaxi · · focus · HN ↗
        I like this way of branching and adding context for the user. It would be interesting to make it more generalizable to other texts.
        1. jmathai · · focus · HN ↗
          You gave me an idea :). The original motivation was to explore the Bible like I explore Wikipedia. I think this UX for Wikipedia would be really amazing. Someone should build it. I hope I don&#x27;t get the itch to do it this weekend!

          <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;trysojourn.app&#x2F;writings&#x2F;explore-the-bible-like-wikipedia&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;trysojourn.app&#x2F;writings&#x2F;explore-the-bible-like-wikip...

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.