If there's two things HN hates it's UX designers, PMs and off-by-one errors. As a UX designer I have to laugh: one of the most important parts of building good UX is humility and a willingness to be wrong. The confidence with with many on HN assert that they know what the right UX is for any app is exactly the same error that bad UX designers make.

As always in product the user's frustration is real and important but their ideas for a fix are almost never the best choice for the product, the company, or most users.

> It’s like these products that are in a way some of the most valuable products in the planet, are given a junior web dev and a “UX designer” who really doesn’t know anything about UX.

What you pay attention to grows. And company's pay attention to those things that move the needle on revenue. For many successful platforms UX doesn't move the needle much anymore (if it ever did). LinkedIn has effectively won their space and a clunky UI isn't going to show up in the numbers.

LinkedIn might have amazing designers on staff, but if leadership isn't prioritizing updates and fixes it won't happen. And leadership won't prioritize it until the problem shows up in the numbers.

Surprised this is your take coming from a UX designer. You think a straight path for every user to add their feature ideas results in a good UX?

edit: reading further into this, the idea is perhaps that users vibe-code their own distinct UX with everything valuable to them. That's not a bad take, but even in that world, I wouldn't think UX and product disciplines become exposed for having no value at all.

My take in this (ironic) comment was just "no feature is free", which I don't think should be odd coming from a UX designer!

> the idea is perhaps that users vibe-code their own distinct UX with everything valuable to them

I do find this interesting. I work on a complex business operations and reporting platform and every facility has their own lil quirks. More control in their hands would let them smooth out their workflows while still relying on the foundational work our platform does.

Ah, I didn't register the sarcasm. Typical HN, it's probably why you're downvoted.

Yes, today's HN session has me nerd-sniped about what the future of product development looks like. I've been thinking how mock-to-prototype is just too slow when engineers can ship so much so fast. Eng needs design direction especially when it's too easy to "solve design" with tailwind components and "You're a designer from a top saas company" prompts.

But what if the new UX is less visual-first and more IA, primitives and well structured object models... now that has me thinking.

> as they scaled, forgot about an individual user

If you're building for individual users you're not going to succeed. We all prioritize for broad success from the beginning.

I'm very into the idea of inversion of control and giving users this flexibility but I agree with GP that the SaaS company critique is misplaced. I hope you find enough success with 100X that you end up coming to the same conclusion.

I'll also add that one of your video examples is essentially a Twitter spam generator; is that the kind of feature you think SaaS companies should be prioritizing?

I created that twitter responder after reading this post (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568028). That wasn't to call out what SaaS companies should prioratise but to show how easy it would be for a user to do it.

Israel kills people then calls them "operatives" after the fact. They have no credibility around these kinds of reports.

I get your point. I don't think it's effective here.

What do you have to say to Hezbollah confirming 400 combatant losses? The Lebanese health ministry also confirmed 1500, of which only 300 were women, children, and health workers.

It's a tragedy.

Gonna need at least a single link to a source before I believe this. Googling provides Facebook links and YouTube videos from Fox News and AI generated “news” sites.

If you’re not cavemaxxing you’re falling behind.

I dropped dead after reading this.

As very much an outsider and, to some extent, apostate to all this, it's pretty astonishing to see.

Unironically not just delegating all thinking to a sketchy and untrustworthy machine, but doubling down on it by aping the caveman in the belief that this will more effectively summon the great metal-wing sky god and bring limitless yum stuff.

Wow. I don't even have to do anything. You guys are disemvoweling yourselves in some kind of strange ritual. You sure are trusting souls!

I believe that everyone deserves food housing and and security regardless of what they do or don’t do professionally. I have no logical argument only a moral one, which I sense would not be sufficient to convince you.

It's hard to be convinced by your moral argument when you don't actually provide it.

From the post it's clear that the shop has a set schedule of services and prices that the bot is pulling from. All the things you're saying are true for a shop that needs to custom quote each job but do not apply to the situation as presented.

It's clear that the author interpreted the data that way, yes.

And perhaps the shop actually charges the same for brakes whether it is an Ford F150 or a Toyota Corolla.

But that seems very unlikely to me. While they're both very common vehicles, they are also very different and the parts have substantially different costs associated with them.

From working in such a place I can also tell you the price depends on who is asking.

As the resident Diagram Maker at my job I really appreciate any and all discourse on the topic. Knowing the purpose of your diagram is a hugely under-appreciated part of the process. Service flow chart or system architecture? High level system overview or actionable, followable flow-chart? The engineer in me always wants to put All The Things in the chart, to make it maximally "correct". It's never the right move. But how to make it clear what's included or not, and why?

I still struggle with finding the best approach each time; I'd love more discussion of this stuff.

Just because you said that you were interested in some Opinions, one of the least appreciated aspects of any documentation (but especially diagrams) is defining who the stakeholders are at the start of the document. It’s the difference between having frustrated users who can’t understand things to happy users that understand limitations.

The corollary to this is that the best diagram that boundaries are often along communication lines between teams. This is Conway’s law all the way down. And the reason is that most often people use diagrams to get a spatial sense of where ‘they’ fit into things. I have only anecdotal evidence for this, but the most helpful and lasting diagrams I’ve ever made are when 1) they define (and stick to) specific stakeholders, and b) they are delineated by groups/teams.

Multiple interlinked diagrams? A whole bunch of diagrams at different levels, from different perspectives all designed to answer different questions?

Yep! That's almost always the correct solution. It can be a lot to figure out, tho: which perspectives are most valuable to present? Are the linkages clear? Does this kind of box belong on THIS chart or THAT chart?!

You are defining the goal of Ilograph to a T.