Technologists often assume AI's goal is to provide a single, perfect answer. However, human psychology requires comparison to feel confident in a choice, which is why Google's "I'm Feeling Lucky" button is almost never clicked. AI must present curated options, not just one optimized result.
AI won't replace designers because it lacks taste and subjective opinion. Instead, as AI gets better at generating highly opinionated (though not perfect) designs, it will serve as a powerful exploration tool. This plants more flags in the option space, allowing human designers to react, curate, and push the most promising directions further, amplifying their strategic role.
Reducing the number of clicks is a misguided metric. A process with eight trivially easy clicks is better than one with two fraught, confusing decisions. Each decision burns cognitive energy and risks making the user feel stupid. The ultimate design goal should be to prevent users from having to think.
Social media algorithms amplify negativity by optimizing for "revealed preference" (what you click on, e.g., car crashes). AI models, however, operate on aspirational choice (what you explicitly ask for). This fundamental difference means AI can reflect a more complex and wholesome version of humanity.
Superhuman designs its AI to avoid "agent laziness," where the AI asks the user for clarification on simple tasks (e.g., "Which time slot do you prefer?"). A truly helpful agent should operate like a human executive assistant, making reasonable decisions autonomously to save the user time.
To get the best results from AI, treat it like a virtual assistant you can have a dialogue with. Instead of focusing on the perfect single prompt, provide rich context about your goals and then engage in a back-and-forth conversation. This collaborative approach yields more nuanced and useful outputs.
The best UI for an AI tool is a direct function of the underlying model's power. A more capable model unlocks more autonomous 'form factors.' For example, the sudden rise of CLI agents was only possible once models like Claude 3 became capable enough to reliably handle multi-step tasks.
Open-ended prompts overwhelm new users who don't know what's possible. A better approach is to productize AI into specific features. Use familiar UI like sliders and dropdowns to gather user intent, which then constructs a complex prompt behind the scenes, making powerful AI accessible without requiring prompt engineering skills.
Contrary to fears of a forced, automated future, AI's greatest impact will be providing 'unparalleled optionality.' It allows individuals to automate tasks they dislike (like reordering groceries) while preserving the ability to manually perform tasks they enjoy (like strolling through a supermarket). It's a tool for personalization, not homogenization.
The promise of AI shouldn't be a one-click solution that removes the user. Instead, AI should be a collaborative partner that augments human capacity. A successful AI product leaves room for user participation, making them feel like they are co-building the experience and have a stake in the outcome.
Instead of forcing AI to be as deterministic as traditional code, we should embrace its "squishy" nature. Humans have deep-seated biological and social models for dealing with unpredictable, human-like agents, making these systems more intuitive to interact with than rigid software.