Dylan Field@zoink
Thoughts:
1. In the future, the probability something is generated entirely by AI will be inversely proportional to its intended lifespan.
2. For conceptually simple artifacts that are intended to have short lifespans, humans will still be involved just at a different level of abstraction. For example, I'm super excited about @Weavy_ai (Figma Weave) because it shows what's possible when you treat AI generation like clay to shape rather than the final output. Workflow building is a new skill to explore and learn.
3. If you intend for an artifact to have a long lifespan (ex: software, a novel, a movie), then AI might still aid you in your creative process. But you will bring great intention to the work. You will think through many different approaches. You will care about the smallest of details. You will lean into the craft. Because if you don't, it won't be good enough to last. It won't be noticed. It won't be loved. It won't matter.
4. Focusing just on software now... people don't like it when software changes. Everyone who has shipped a redesign knows this! So you might be generating new content within a piece of software frequently but of course you wouldn't redesign the fundamental UX of the software all the time. Users would hate it.
As a grounding metaphor, consider a house. Yes, you might change the photos and papers and magnets stuck to your fridge a few times a week. Once in a while, you reorganize stuff or move furniture around. After living in the house for a while, you maybe notice issues around how you use the space and — with great intention — embark on a remodel.
Some parts of the house, like the fridge, change a lot. But the overall structure of the house changes less. When asking what will be generated by AI, don't confuse the whole for the parts, the long lasting for the ephemeral.
5. It's intellectually interesting to think about whether a brand might want to adapt their software on a user by user basis. (Certainly individuals will be able to make more software for themselves if they are so inclined. For example, see Figma Make.)
That said, my strong gut right now is that we will not end up in a world where brands customize software on a per user basis.
People learn how to use software from other humans. Snapchat is a great example. For a new user, Snapchat is kind of confusing. You can see this as a design issue or an advantage... I argue it's an advantage.
By leaning into custom patterns and a learnable (but arguably non-intuitive) interface, the resulting network is a more intentional space. If you're young, you'll learn how to use Snapchat by watching your friends use Snapchat. And if you're older, well, you might not be the intended demographic.
6. To wrap up... we are in a world where the amount of software is growing at an exponential rate. If you want to win, design is the differentiator. Invest in design, craft, storytelling and a bold point of view.
Use AI as a tool, but don't expect it to build the next big thing for you on its own. Don't expect it to make something that no one has ever seen or imagined before. That's your job.
