Full Width [alt+shift+f] Shortcuts [alt+shift+k]
Sign Up [alt+shift+s] Log In [alt+shift+l]

Improve your reading experience

Logged in users get linked directly to articles resulting in a better reading experience. Please login for free, it takes less than 1 minute.

More from UX Collective

Our human habit of anthropomorphizing everything

Weekly curated resources for designers — thinkers and makers.

a week ago 10 votes
Office politics: the skill they never taught us

Weekly curated resources for designers — thinkers and makers.

2 weeks ago 17 votes
UX, how can I trust you?

Weekly curated resources for designers — thinkers and makers.

3 weeks ago 16 votes
It’s time for design to think less and feel more

Weekly curated resources for designers — thinkers and makers.

a month ago 19 votes

More in design

Surf the browser

A guest's identity

15 hours ago 2 votes
The case against conversational interfaces

01 Intro Conversational interfaces are a bit of a meme. Every couple of years a shiny new AI development emerges and people in tech go “This is it! The next computing paradigm is here! We’ll only use natural language going forward!”. But then nothing actually changes and we continue using computers the way we always […]

10 hours ago 2 votes
Private Client Offices by SPACE

SPACE in Guildford designed a 50,000 square-foot office with a focus on sustainability, featuring a striking atrium, collaborative spaces, and...

12 hours ago 1 votes
The Value of Experience

Adam Silver has an article titled “Do you trust design advice from ChatGPT?” wherein he prompted the LLM: How do you add hint text to radio buttons? It gave various suggestions, each of which Adam breaks down. Here’s an an example response from ChatGPT: If you want the hint to appear when the user hovers on the radio button, use a tooltip for a cleaner design Adam’s response: ‘If you want’ Design is not about what you want. It’s about what users need. ‘use a tooltip’ If a hint is useful, why hide it behind a difficult-to-use and inaccessible interaction? ‘for a cleaner design’ Design is about clarity, not cleanliness. Adam’s point-by-point breakdowns are excellent. The entire article is a great example of how plausible-sounding ideas can quickly fall apart under scrutiny from an expert who reframes the issue. It’s funny how prevalent this feels in our age of fast-paced information overload. You read an argument and it seems rational — that is, if you don’t think about it too long, which who has the time? But an expert with deep experience can quickly refute these mediocre rationales and offer a more informed perspective that leaves you wondering how you ever nodded along to the original argument in the first place. Humorously, it reminds me of the culture of conspiracy theories where the burden of proof is on you to disprove the bare assertions being made (a time-consuming job). Hence the value of experience (and what’s experience but an investment of time?) to pierce through these kinds of middle-of-the-road rationales. Experience helps clarify and articulate what lesser experience cannot see, let alone articulate. That all leads me back to Adam: ChatGPT pulls unreliable, uninformed and untrustworthy design advice from the internet and delivers it with confidence. I mean you can certainly listen to its advice. But I think it’s better to develop the instinct to ask the right questions and be able to recognise bad advice when you see it. There’s no shortcut to gaining experience. You can’t consume enough content to get it. You have to do. Email · Mastodon · Bluesky

2 days ago 2 votes
I was wrong about AI Coding

I'm mostly anti-AI person since the AI hype started years ago. However with time I realized that I misjudged AI Coding — Here’s Why.

2 days ago 3 votes